Trigraphs.
David Collier-Brown
daveb at geac.UUCP
Wed Jun 8 22:23:52 AEST 1988
In article <19345 at watmath.waterloo.edu> rbutterworth at watmath.waterloo.edu (Ray Butterworth) writes:
| Let's consider the various combinations of compilers and terminals.
| Commonly, either of these can be US-ASCII, 7-bit French-ASCII (or
| some other national character set), or 8-bit IS0-ASCII.
[ case analysis elided]
| That reduces the cases that need trigraphs to those that have
| French-ASCII terminals and that also prefer to avoid using the
| national keys.
| Consider that at the moment trigraphs don't even exist outside
| the minds of the X3J11 Committee, and decide how many people
| that now use the funny characters and are going to switch to
| using trigraphs.
Ok, can someone quote the approximate reasoning behind the
consideration of trigraphs?
As Ray has made a good case against the problem's existance, I
therefor wonder
1) if some "outside" body has dictated that the standard
committee "solve" it[1] or
2) if the committee merely misestimated the significance of
the problem.
--dave c-b
[1] Suggested without proof earlier in the discussion, source not
recorded.
--
David Collier-Brown. {mnetor yunexus utgpu}!geac!daveb
Geac Computers Ltd., | "His Majesty made you a major
350 Steelcase Road, | because he believed you would
Markham, Ontario. | know when not to obey his orders"
More information about the Comp.std.c
mailing list