K&R Answers?

[Zach]

I recall someone posting a website that had the complete K&R (2nd Ed.
- ANSI) answers posted but I cannot find the post.

Zach

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Zach said:

I recall someone posting a website that had the complete K&R (2nd Ed.
- ANSI) answers posted but I cannot find the post.

Not complete (if I recall correctly) - but the Web site you're looking for
is:

<http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/K&R2_solutions>

 

[Zach]

Zach said:


Not complete (if I recall correctly) - but the Web site you're looking for
is:

<http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/K&R2_solutions>

Thanks Richard.

Zach

 

[santosh]

news:3c8dd0c2-8f30-41ec-8b30-b3901442e7ee@n75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

There's a worthwhile hard-copy available. _The C Solution Book_
About 3/8" thick and fewer errata than the covers of Unleashed.

Do you mean /The C Answer Book/ by Clovis & Tondo?

I'm curious what's at that link.

Solutions to some of the exercises in K&R2, contributed by various clc
participants.

 

[stop]

Thanks Richard.

Zach

There's a worthwhile hard-copy available. _The C Solution Book_ About 3/8"
thick and fewer errata than the covers of Unleashed.

I'm curious what's at that link.

 

[stop]

Zach said:


Not complete (if I recall correctly) - but the Web site you're looking for
is:

<http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/K&R2_solutions>

I bookmarked the resource. It will save me occasionally from the abuse of
having to straighten out my C syntax here.

#from the site
The folks in comp.lang.c may tend to come across as Standard-thumping
fundamentalists, continuing to insist, with ramrod-straight demeanor, that
all code be strictly conforming, as if it's only important for its own sake.
But the insistence is not merely for its own sake: much more importantly,
it's for the sake of code that's correct, not just in the ANSI C Standard
sense, but in the much more important "works reliably in the real world"
sense. As Steve Summit wrote on an occasion when this issue came up, "I'm
not a Standard-thumping fundamentalist who worships at the altar of X3J11
because I'm an anal-retentive dweeb who loves pouncing on people who
innocently post code containing void main() to comp.lang.c; I'm a
Standard-thumping fundamentalist who worships at the altar of X3J11 because
it gives me eminently useful guarantees about the programs I write and helps
me ensure that they'll work correctly next week and next month and next
year, in environments I haven't heard of or can't imagine or that haven't
been invented yet, and without continual hands-on bugfixing and coddling by
me.
#end excerpt

Richard refers to the standard in the singular here. I think a lot of
questions get caught in the crosshairs between standards. What catches my
eye though is 3J as oppsoed to J3. Does X3J11 actually exist?

 

[Richard Heathfield]

stop said:

#from the site [ <http://clc-wiki.net/wiki ]
The folks in comp.lang.c may tend to come across as Standard-thumping
fundamentalists, continuing to insist, with ramrod-straight demeanor,
that all code be strictly conforming, as if it's only important for its
own sake. But the insistence is not merely for its own sake: much more
importantly, it's for the sake of code that's correct, not just in the
ANSI C Standard sense, but in the much more important "works reliably in
the real world" sense. As Steve Summit wrote on an occasion when this
issue came up, "I'm not a Standard-thumping fundamentalist who worships
at the altar of X3J11 because I'm an anal-retentive dweeb who loves
pouncing on people who innocently post code containing void main() to
comp.lang.c; I'm a Standard-thumping fundamentalist who worships at the
altar of X3J11 because it gives me eminently useful guarantees about the
programs I write and helps me ensure that they'll work correctly next
week and next month and next year, in environments I haven't heard of or
can't imagine or that haven't been invented yet, and without continual
hands-on bugfixing and coddling by me.
#end excerpt

Richard refers to the standard in the singular here.

I don't remember writing the above, and I'm reasonably sure I /didn't/
write the above. Any of it. The second half of it appears to have been
written by Steve Summit (presumably in a Usenet article). And the first
half? Well, I *might* have written it, but I don't think so.

What catches my eye though is 3J as oppsoed to J3. Does X3J11
actually exist?

It certainly did, because it was the ANSI Committee that produced the C89
Standard. Whether it still does, I have no idea.

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

I recall someone posting a website that had the complete K&R (2nd Ed.
- ANSI) answers posted but I cannot find the post.

Well about a K&R2 exercise posted in another thread. I think the answer:

http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/K&R2_solutions:Chapter_2:Exercise_1

#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>

int
main ()
{
printf("Size of Char %d\n", CHAR_BIT);
printf("Size of Char Max %d\n", CHAR_MAX);
printf("Size of Char Min %d\n", CHAR_MIN);
printf("Size of int min %d\n", INT_MIN);
printf("Size of int max %d\n", INT_MAX);
printf("Size of long min %ld\n", LONG_MIN); /* RB */
printf("Size of long max %ld\n", LONG_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of short min %d\n", SHRT_MIN);
printf("Size of short max %d\n", SHRT_MAX);
printf("Size of unsigned char %u\n", UCHAR_MAX); /* SF */
printf("Size of unsigned long %lu\n", ULONG_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of unsigned int %u\n", UINT_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of unsigned short %u\n", USHRT_MAX); /* SF */

return 0;
}


is wrong and a bit incomplete.


I think the correct one is:


#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>

int main ()
{
printf("Size of Char %d\n", CHAR_BIT);
printf("Size of Char Max %d\n", CHAR_MAX);
printf("Size of Char Min %d\n", CHAR_MIN);
printf("Size of int min %d\n", INT_MIN);
printf("Size of int max %d\n", INT_MAX);
printf("Size of long min %ld\n", LONG_MIN); /* RB */
printf("Size of long max %ld\n", LONG_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of short min %d\n", SHRT_MIN);
printf("Size of short max %d\n", SHRT_MAX);
==> printf("Size of unsigned char max %u\n", (unsigned) UCHAR_MAX);
==> printf("Size of unsigned long max %lu\n", ULONG_MAX); /* RB */
==> printf("Size of unsigned int max %u\n", UINT_MAX); /* RB */
==> printf("Size of unsigned short max %u\n", USHRT_MAX); /* SF */

return 0;
}

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Well about a K&R2 exercise posted in another thread. I think the answer:

http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/K&R2_solutions:Chapter_2:Exercise_1

#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>

int
main ()
{
printf("Size of Char %d\n", CHAR_BIT);
printf("Size of Char Max %d\n", CHAR_MAX);
printf("Size of Char Min %d\n", CHAR_MIN);
printf("Size of int min %d\n", INT_MIN);
printf("Size of int max %d\n", INT_MAX);
printf("Size of long min %ld\n", LONG_MIN); /* RB */
printf("Size of long max %ld\n", LONG_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of short min %d\n", SHRT_MIN);
printf("Size of short max %d\n", SHRT_MAX);
printf("Size of unsigned char %u\n", UCHAR_MAX); /* SF */
printf("Size of unsigned long %lu\n", ULONG_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of unsigned int %u\n", UINT_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of unsigned short %u\n", USHRT_MAX); /* SF */

return 0;
}


is wrong and a bit incomplete.


I think the correct one is:

More:


#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>

int main ()
{

==> printf("Bits of Char %d\n", CHAR_BIT);

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Ioannis Vranos said:

Well about a K&R2 exercise posted in another thread. I think the answer:

http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/K&R2_solutions:Chapter_2:Exercise_1

is wrong and a bit incomplete.

Then why not submit your own version to the C wiki?

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Ioannis Vranos said:




Then why not submit your own version to the C wiki?

I can't find out how to create an account.

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Then why not submit your own version to the C wiki?

OK, I edited the text.

 

[Flash Gordon]

Ioannis Vranos wrote, On 16/03/08 15:45:

I can't find out how to create an account.

There is a box in the top right corner which when you hover the mouse
over it will give you the login/creat account options. Alternatively
alt+shift+O should work. Email me if you still have problems.

 

[Keith Thompson]

Well about a K&R2 exercise posted in another thread. I think the answer:

http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/K&R2_solutions:Chapter_2:Exercise_1

#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>

int
main ()
{
printf("Size of Char %d\n", CHAR_BIT);
printf("Size of Char Max %d\n", CHAR_MAX);
printf("Size of Char Min %d\n", CHAR_MIN);
printf("Size of int min %d\n", INT_MIN);
printf("Size of int max %d\n", INT_MAX);
printf("Size of long min %ld\n", LONG_MIN); /* RB */
printf("Size of long max %ld\n", LONG_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of short min %d\n", SHRT_MIN);
printf("Size of short max %d\n", SHRT_MAX);
printf("Size of unsigned char %u\n", UCHAR_MAX); /* SF */
printf("Size of unsigned long %lu\n", ULONG_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of unsigned int %u\n", UINT_MAX); /* RB */
printf("Size of unsigned short %u\n", USHRT_MAX); /* SF */

return 0;
}


is wrong and a bit incomplete.


I think the correct one is:

[snip]

The more serious problem is that the messages are worded incorrectly.
It prints, for example (on my system):

Size of int max 2147483647

2147483647 is not a size, it's an upper bound.

The two lines
printf("Size of int min %d\n", INT_MIN);
printf("Size of int max %d\n", INT_MAX);
should be replaced with something like:
printf("Range of int is %d to %d\n", INT_MIN, INT_MAX);

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

The more serious problem is that the messages are worded incorrectly.
It prints, for example (on my system):

Size of int max 2147483647

2147483647 is not a size, it's an upper bound.

The two lines
printf("Size of int min %d\n", INT_MIN);
printf("Size of int max %d\n", INT_MAX);
should be replaced with something like:
printf("Range of int is %d to %d\n", INT_MIN, INT_MAX);

Fixed. I think your contribution is made clear in the text, if not
please post a reply.

 

[santosh]

Ioannis Vranos wrote:

<snip code to print numerical limits>

I also found the following in my archives. I remember that it was a
bitch to type out.

/* Program to print various implementation defined numerical limits.
*
* Set C99_CONFORMANCE to one if your compiler supports the features
* needed by this program, but fails to define __STDC_VERSION to
* 199901L.
*
* TODO: Include complex and imaginary types and features of the runtime
* floating point environment through <fenv.h>
*/
#define C99_CONFORMANCE 1
#if __STDC_VERSION__ == 199901L || C99_CONFORMANCE == 1
#define HAVE_C99 1
#endif

#include <stddef.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <limits.h>
#include <float.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <wchar.h>

#ifdef HAVE_C99
#include <inttypes.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
#endif

int main(void)
{
int dummy;
printf(
"\nCHAR_BIT == %d\n\n"
"Type\t\t\tSize\tMin.\t\t\tMax.\n"
"============================================================\n\n"
#if HAVE_C99 && __bool_true_false_are_defined
"bool\t\t\t%u\n"
#elif HAVE_C99
"_Bool\t\t\t%u\n"
#endif
"char\t\t\t1\t%d\t\t\t%u\n"
"signed char\t\t1\t%d\t\t\t%d\n"
"unsigned char\t\t1\t0\t\t\t%u\n"
"short\t\t\t%u\t%d\t\t\t%d\n"
"unsigned short\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%u\n"
"int\t\t\t%u\t%d\t\t%d\n"
"unsigned int\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%u\n"
"long\t\t\t%u\t%ld\t\t%ld\n"
"unsigned long\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%lu\n",
CHAR_BIT,
#if HAVE_C99 && __bool_true_false_are_defined
(unsigned)sizeof(bool),
#elif HAVE_C99
(unsigned)sizeof(_Bool),
#endif
CHAR_MIN, CHAR_MAX,
SCHAR_MIN, SCHAR_MAX,
UCHAR_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(short), SHRT_MIN, SHRT_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(unsigned short), USHRT_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(int), INT_MIN, INT_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(unsigned int), UINT_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(long), LONG_MIN, LONG_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(unsigned long), ULONG_MAX);
#ifdef HAVE_C99
printf(
"long long\t\t%u\t%lld\t%lld\n"
"unsigned long long\t%u\t0\t\t\t%llu\n",
(unsigned)sizeof(long long), LLONG_MIN, LLONG_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(unsigned long long), ULLONG_MAX);
#endif
printf(
"float\t\t\t%u\t%g\t\t%g\n"
"double\t\t\t%u\t%g\t\t%g\n"
"long double\t\t%u\t%Lg\t\t%Lg\n",
(unsigned)sizeof(float), FLT_MIN, FLT_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(double), DBL_MIN, DBL_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(long double), LDBL_MIN, LDBL_MAX);
printf(
"\nAdditional properties of floating types:\n"
"FLT_RADIX\t\t%d\n"
"FLT_MANT_DIG\t\t%d\n"
"DBL_MANT_DIG\t\t%d\n"
"LDBL_MANT_DIG\t\t%d\n"
#ifdef HAVE_C99
"DECIMAL_DIG\t\t%d\n"
#endif
"FLT_DIG\t\t\t%d\n"
"DBL_DIG\t\t\t%d\n"
"LDBL_DIG\t\t%d\n"
"FLT_MIN_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"FLT_MAX_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"DBL_MIN_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"DBL_MAX_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"LDBL_MIN_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"LDBL_MAX_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"FLT_MIN_10_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"FLT_MAX_10_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"DBL_MIN_10_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"DBL_MAX_10_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"LDBL_MIN_10_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"LDBL_MAX_10_EXP\t\t%d\n"
"FLT_EPSILON\t\t%g\n"
"DBL_EPSILON\t\t%g\n"
"LDBL_EPSILON\t\t%Lg\n",
FLT_RADIX, FLT_MANT_DIG, DBL_MANT_DIG, LDBL_MANT_DIG,
#ifdef HAVE_C99
DECIMAL_DIG,
#endif
FLT_DIG, DBL_DIG, LDBL_DIG, FLT_MIN_EXP, FLT_MAX_EXP,
DBL_MIN_EXP,
DBL_MAX_EXP, LDBL_MIN_EXP, LDBL_MAX_EXP, FLT_MIN_10_EXP,
FLT_MAX_10_EXP, DBL_MIN_10_EXP, DBL_MAX_10_EXP, LDBL_MIN_10_EXP,
LDBL_MAX_10_EXP, FLT_EPSILON, DBL_EPSILON, LDBL_EPSILON);

#ifdef HAVE_C99
printf(
"\nProperties of types defined in stdint.h\n"
#ifdef INT8_MIN
"int8_t\t\t\t%u\t%" PRId8 "\t\t\t%" PRId8 "\n"
"uint8_t\t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIu8 "\n"
#endif
#ifdef INT16_MIN
"int16_t\t\t\t%u\t%" PRId16 "\t\t\t%" PRId16 "\n"
"uint16_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIu16 "\n"
#endif
#ifdef INT32_MIN
"int32_t\t\t\t%u\t%" PRId32 "\t\t%" PRId32 "\n"
"uint32_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIu32 "\n"
#endif
#ifdef INT64_MIN
"int64_t\t\t\t%u\t%" PRId64 "\t%" PRId64 "\n"
"uint64_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIu64 "\n"
#endif
"int_least8_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdLEAST8 "\t\t\t%" PRIdLEAST8 "\n"
"uint_least8_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuLEAST8 "\n"
"int_least16_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdLEAST16 "\t\t\t%" PRIdLEAST16 "\n"
"uint_least16_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuLEAST16 "\n"
"int_least32_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdLEAST32 "\t\t%" PRIdLEAST32 "\n"
"uint_least32_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuLEAST32 "\n"
"int_least64_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdLEAST64 "\t%" PRIdLEAST64 "\n"
"uint_least64_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuLEAST64 "\n"
"int_fast8_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdFAST8 "\t\t\t%" PRIdFAST8 "\n"
"uint_fast8_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuFAST8 "\n"
"int_fast16_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdFAST16 "\t\t%" PRIdFAST16 "\n"
"uint_fast16_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuFAST16 "\n"
"int_fast32_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdFAST32 "\t\t%" PRIdFAST32 "\n"
"uint_fast32_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuFAST32 "\n"
"int_fast64_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdFAST64 "\t%" PRIdFAST64 "\n"
"uint_fast64_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuFAST64 "\n"
"intmax_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdMAX "\t%" PRIdMAX "\n"
"uintmax_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuMAX "\n"
#ifdef INTPTR_MIN
"intptr_t\t\t%u\t%" PRIdPTR "\t\t%" PRIdPTR "\n"
#endif
#ifdef UINTPTR_MAX
"uintptr_t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%" PRIuPTR "\n"
#endif
"%n"
,
#ifdef INT8_MIN
(unsigned)sizeof(int8_t), INT8_MIN, INT8_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint8_t), UINT8_MAX,
#endif
#ifdef INT16_MIN
(unsigned)sizeof(int16_t), INT16_MIN, INT16_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint16_t), UINT16_MAX,
#endif
#ifdef INT32_MIN
(unsigned)sizeof(int32_t), INT32_MIN, INT32_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint32_t), UINT32_MAX,
#endif
#ifdef INT64_MIN
(unsigned)sizeof(int64_t), INT64_MIN, INT64_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint64_t), UINT64_MAX,
#endif
(unsigned)sizeof(int_least8_t), INT_LEAST8_MIN, INT_LEAST8_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint_least8_t), UINT_LEAST8_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(int_least16_t), INT_LEAST16_MIN,
INT_LEAST16_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint_least16_t), UINT_LEAST16_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(int_least32_t), INT_LEAST32_MIN,
INT_LEAST32_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint_least32_t), UINT_LEAST32_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(int_least64_t), INT_LEAST64_MIN,
INT_LEAST64_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint_least64_t), UINT_LEAST64_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(int_fast8_t), INT_FAST8_MIN, INT_FAST8_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint_fast8_t), UINT_FAST8_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(int_fast16_t), INT_FAST16_MIN, INT_FAST16_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint_fast16_t), UINT_FAST16_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(int_fast32_t), INT_FAST32_MIN, INT_FAST32_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint_fast32_t), UINT_FAST32_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(int_fast64_t), INT_FAST64_MIN, INT_FAST64_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uint_fast64_t), UINT_FAST64_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(intmax_t), INTMAX_MIN, INTMAX_MAX,
(unsigned)sizeof(uintmax_t), UINTMAX_MAX,
#ifdef INTPTR_MIN
(unsigned)sizeof(intptr_t), INTPTR_MIN, INTPTR_MAX,
#endif
#ifdef UINTPTR_MAX
(unsigned)sizeof(uintptr_t), UINTPTR_MAX,
#endif
&dummy);
#endif

printf(
"\nOther types:\n"
"ptrdiff_t\t\t%u"
#ifdef PTRDIFF_MIN
"\t%td\t\t%td"
#endif
"\n"
"size_t\t\t\t%u\t0\t\t\t%lu\n"
#ifdef WCHAR_MIN
"wchar_t\t\t\t%u\t%ld\t\t%lu\n"
#endif
#ifdef WINT_MIN
"wint_t\t\t\t%u\t%d\t\t\t%u\n"
#endif
"sig_atomic_t\t\t%u"
#ifdef SIG_ATOMIC_MIN
"\t%d\t\t%u"
#endif
"\n"

"BUFSIZ\t\t\t%lu\n"
"FOPEN_MAX\t\t%u\n"
"FILENAME_MAX\t\t%u\n"
"L_tmpnam\t\t%u\n"
"TMP_MAX\t\t\t%lu\n"
"RAND_MAX\t\t%lu\n"
"MB_LEN_MAX\t\t%lu\n"
"MB_CUR_MAX\t\t%lu\n"
"%n",
(unsigned)sizeof(ptrdiff_t),
#ifdef PTRDIFF_MIN
PTRDIFF_MIN, PTRDIFF_MAX,
#endif
(unsigned)sizeof(size_t), (unsigned long)((size_t)-1),
#ifdef WCHAR_MIN
(unsigned)sizeof(wchar_t), WCHAR_MIN, WCHAR_MAX,
#endif
#ifdef WINT_MIN
(unsigned)sizeof(wint_t), WINT_MIN, WINT_MAX,
#endif
(unsigned)sizeof(sig_atomic_t),
#ifdef SIG_ATOMIC_MIN
SIG_ATOMIC_MIN, SIG_ATOMIC_MAX,
#endif
(unsigned long)BUFSIZ, FOPEN_MAX, FILENAME_MAX, L_tmpnam,
(unsigned long)TMP_MAX, (unsigned long)RAND_MAX,
(unsigned long)MB_LEN_MAX, (unsigned long)MB_CUR_MAX, &dummy);

return 0;
}

 

[stop]

stop said:

#from the site [ <http://clc-wiki.net/wiki ]
The folks in comp.lang.c may tend to come across as Standard-thumping
fundamentalists, continuing to insist, with ramrod-straight demeanor,
that all code be strictly conforming, as if it's only important for its
own sake. But the insistence is not merely for its own sake: much more
importantly, it's for the sake of code that's correct, not just in the
ANSI C Standard sense, but in the much more important "works reliably in
the real world" sense. As Steve Summit wrote on an occasion when this
issue came up, "I'm not a Standard-thumping fundamentalist who worships
at the altar of X3J11 because I'm an anal-retentive dweeb who loves
pouncing on people who innocently post code containing void main() to
comp.lang.c; I'm a Standard-thumping fundamentalist who worships at the
altar of X3J11 because it gives me eminently useful guarantees about the
programs I write and helps me ensure that they'll work correctly next
week and next month and next year, in environments I haven't heard of or
can't imagine or that haven't been invented yet, and without continual
hands-on bugfixing and coddling by me.
#end excerpt

Richard refers to the standard in the singular here.

I don't remember writing the above, and I'm reasonably sure I /didn't/
write the above. Any of it. The second half of it appears to have been
written by Steve Summit (presumably in a Usenet article). And the first
half? Well, I *might* have written it, but I don't think so.

Reading was never your strong suit. The text does sound like you but looks
like it may have been pasted together.

It certainly did, because it was the ANSI Committee that produced the C89
Standard. Whether it still does, I have no idea.

In the common C extension that is fortran, the J3 committee is kind of like
a benevolent politburo. I never saw anything that might motivate the name
except to see the letters reversed in X3J11.

 

[stop]

Do you mean /The C Answer Book/ by Clovis & Tondo?

Yup. I dug it out today while I was moving crates of books. It's more like
5/8".

The authors are Tondo and Gimpel. Mr. Tondo's first name is Clovis. I'm
reasonably certain I've never met a Clovis before.

 

[Keith Thompson]

stop said (quoting somebody else): [snip]

As Steve Summit wrote on an occasion when this
issue came up, "I'm not a Standard-thumping fundamentalist who worships
at the altar of X3J11 because I'm an anal-retentive dweeb who loves
pouncing on people who innocently post code containing void main() to
comp.lang.c; I'm a Standard-thumping fundamentalist who worships at the
altar of X3J11 because it gives me eminently useful guarantees about the
programs I write and helps me ensure that they'll work correctly next
week and next month and next year, in environments I haven't heard of or
can't imagine or that haven't been invented yet, and without continual
hands-on bugfixing and coddling by me. [snip]
What catches my eye though is 3J as oppsoed to J3. Does X3J11
actually exist?

It certainly did, because it was the ANSI Committee that produced the C89
Standard. Whether it still does, I have no idea.

In the common C extension that is fortran, the J3 committee is kind of like
a benevolent politburo. I never saw anything that might motivate the name
except to see the letters reversed in X3J11.

X3 is the former name for INCITS, the InterNational Committee for
Information Technology Standards; see <http://www.x3.org/>.

Within X3, J3 (or X3J3) is the Technical Committee for Fortran, and
J11 (or X3J11) is the Tehnical Committee for C; see
<http://www.incits.org>.

One source says that X3J11 was originally formed by ANSI. I'm not
sure of the current relationship between ANSI and INCITS, or of the
organizational history.

I suggest that a quick Google search for "X3J11" would have cleared up
your confusion.

 

[santosh]

Yup. I dug it out today while I was moving crates of books. It's
more like 5/8".

The authors are Tondo and Gimpel. Mr. Tondo's first name is Clovis.
I'm reasonably certain I've never met a Clovis before.

You are right, thanks.