Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 12/4/83; site rlgvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!rlgvax!jack From: jack@rlgvax.UUCP (Jack Waugh) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: Re: Anyone on ANSI standard C Message-ID: <1672@rlgvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 6-Feb-84 19:20:54 EST Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1672 Posted: Mon Feb 6 19:20:54 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 9-Feb-84 13:21:51 EST References: <652@ihuxx.UUCP> Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA Lines: 40 Here are my notes on the talk on ANSI in the UNI-FORUM session on standards (certainly subject to possible error): ANSI Techincal Committee X3J11 is set up to consider a standard for the C Programming Language. Anyone may attend the meetings. Voting is on a one company, one vote basis. At any given meeting, any company that has been at the previous two meetings gets a vote. I don't know whether there's a requirement that the same person represent the same company or not. If your company wants to become a member of X3J11, contact Jim Brodie at Motorola, Tempe, Arizona (I didn't get the ZIP). The language the committee is working toward certainly will closely resemble the C that we all "know and love". Among the "daring extentions" being considered are argument type checking or coercion, and a "const" storage class. "Const" objects could be stored in read-only space ("text", in UNIX jargon). The argument type checking would be based on function declarations like the following examples: int strcmp((char *), (char *)); void sync((void)); The second example means 'sync' can take no arguments at all, whereas void sync(); would, as now, mean the programmer declines to specify how many and what type of arguments it takes. The committee intends to try to get a draft out by the end of 1984, and the final standard by 1986. end