C11 reference book

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Ioannis Vranos, Jan 3, 2012.

  1. Hi all,

    Since C11 is finalised, does anyone know any upcoming C11 learn/reference book, like TCPL2 was for C90?

    Is there anything like this for C99?


    Thanks a lot,

    Ioannis Vranos

    http://tcho.net/cppdeveloper
    Ioannis Vranos, Jan 3, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ioannis Vranos wrote:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > Since C11 is finalised, does anyone know any upcoming C11 learn/reference book, like TCPL2 was for C90?


    All I know is:
    a) They discovered threads
    b) " have some sort of a synchronization for a)
    c) this is c.l.c


    :p
    -rasp
    Ralph Spitzner, Jan 4, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ioannis Vranos

    Jorgen Grahn Guest

    On Wed, 2012-01-04, Ralph Spitzner wrote:
    > Ioannis Vranos wrote:
    >> Hi all,
    >>
    >> Since C11 is finalised, does anyone know any upcoming C11
    >> learn/reference book, like TCPL2 was for C90?

    >
    > All I know is:
    > a) They discovered threads
    > b) " have some sort of a synchronization for a)
    > c) this is c.l.c


    Why wouldn't C11 be ontopic here? Did you think he meant C++11?

    /Jorgen

    --
    // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
    \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
    Jorgen Grahn, Jan 4, 2012
    #3
  4. Ioannis Vranos

    Jorgen Grahn Guest

    On Wed, 2012-01-04, superpollo wrote:
    > Jorgen Grahn ha scritto:
    >> On Wed, 2012-01-04, Ralph Spitzner wrote:
    >>> Ioannis Vranos wrote:
    >>>> Hi all,
    >>>>
    >>>> Since C11 is finalised, does anyone know any upcoming C11
    >>>> learn/reference book, like TCPL2 was for C90?
    >>> All I know is:
    >>> a) They discovered threads
    >>> b) " have some sort of a synchronization for a)
    >>> c) this is c.l.c

    >>
    >> Why wouldn't C11 be ontopic here? Did you think he meant C++11?

    >
    > maybe he meant "go to comp.std.c".


    Possibly, although I fail to see that c.s.c would be a better place to
    ask the question.

    I should add that my interpretation of "this is c.l.c" as "you are
    offtopic" was just a guess.

    /Jorgen

    --
    // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
    \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
    Jorgen Grahn, Jan 4, 2012
    #4
  5. Ioannis Vranos

    Quentin Pope Guest

    On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 19:56:10 +0000, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
    > On Wed, 2012-01-04, superpollo wrote:
    >> Jorgen Grahn ha scritto:
    >>> On Wed, 2012-01-04, Ralph Spitzner wrote:
    >>>> Ioannis Vranos wrote:
    >>>>> Hi all,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Since C11 is finalised, does anyone know any upcoming C11
    >>>>> learn/reference book, like TCPL2 was for C90?
    >>>> All I know is:
    >>>> a) They discovered threads
    >>>> b) " have some sort of a synchronization for a) c) this is c.l.c
    >>>
    >>> Why wouldn't C11 be ontopic here? Did you think he meant C++11?

    >>
    >> maybe he meant "go to comp.std.c".

    >
    > Possibly, although I fail to see that c.s.c would be a better place to
    > ask the question.
    >
    > I should add that my interpretation of "this is c.l.c" as "you are
    > offtopic" was just a guess.


    In my opinion, until there is a conforming C11 compiler available on some
    platform, discussion of C11 is purely theoretical and belongs in
    comp.std.c.

    Having said that, by that standard, C99 is only barely topical in
    comp.lang.c, just scraping in by the skin of its teeth.

    C90 will be the only truly portable C standard for another generation.
    Quentin Pope, Jan 4, 2012
    #5
  6. Ioannis Vranos

    James Kuyper Guest

    On 01/04/2012 05:25 PM, Quentin Pope wrote:
    > On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 19:56:10 +0000, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
    >> On Wed, 2012-01-04, superpollo wrote:
    >>> Jorgen Grahn ha scritto:

    ....
    >>>> Why wouldn't C11 be ontopic here? Did you think he meant C++11?
    >>>
    >>> maybe he meant "go to comp.std.c".

    >>
    >> Possibly, although I fail to see that c.s.c would be a better place to
    >> ask the question.
    >>
    >> I should add that my interpretation of "this is c.l.c" as "you are
    >> offtopic" was just a guess.

    >
    > In my opinion, until there is a conforming C11 compiler available on some
    > platform, discussion of C11 is purely theoretical and belongs in
    > comp.std.c.


    comp.std.c if for discussions about the C standard: what it says now,
    what it said in previous versions, what it should say in future
    versions, whether a given piece of code had defined behavior according
    to that standard, whether a given compiler conforms to that standard,
    etc. Discussions about the language defined by that standard are
    off-topic in that group, except insofar as they also involve issues
    about the standard itself. It seems like a subtle distinction, but it
    really isn't; "Are compound literals allowed by the standard?", "Is it
    feasible to implement compound literals?", and "Should compound literals
    be removed from the standard?" are all on-topic. "How do I use compound
    literals?" is off-topic there.

    comp.lang.c.moderated is for discussions of the standard C language,
    even purely theoretical aspects of it, such as how to use features of
    C11 that no one has implemented yet. comp.lang.c is a group with no
    particular charter, that is commonly used for that same purpose, but is
    also heavily troll-infested. It's also, for some reason, used instead of
    comp.compilers.lcc for announcements concerning lcc-win32. If and when
    more people to move their discussions over to comp.lang.c.moderated
    (don't hold your breath), we can finally abandon this newsgroup to the
    trolls and the advertisers.
    James Kuyper, Jan 5, 2012
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Keith Thompson

    Reasonably priced C11 standard?

    Keith Thompson, Jan 25, 2012, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    85
    Views:
    2,534
    Deirdre
    Apr 6, 2012
  2. Quentin Pope

    Comparing C11 compilers

    Quentin Pope, Feb 6, 2012, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    4,431
    Rui Maciel
    Feb 6, 2012
  3. Lord Voldermort
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    833
    David Thompson
    Mar 1, 2012
  4. lovecreatesbeauty

    Queries about new C paper work C11

    lovecreatesbeauty, May 20, 2012, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    530
    James Kuyper
    May 20, 2012
  5. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    334
Loading...

Share This Page