Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Paul Edwards" <mutazilah@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: encapsulating directory operations
Date: Fri, 23 May 2025 08:06:36 +1000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <100o75g$3mc08$1@dont-email.me>
References: <100h650$23r5l$1@dont-email.me> <20250520065158.709@kylheku.com><100i2la$292le$1@dont-email.me><87a5770xjw.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com><100j09o$2f04b$1@dont-email.me><87tt5ezx9y.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com><100j4t3$2foah$1@dont-email.me><87ldqqzfj0.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com><100kak8$2q0s6$1@dont-email.me> <87a575zvmb.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 23 May 2025 00:06:41 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9b6e527ae96f39b01313061b79abe237";
	logging-data="3878920"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/D9OvnUSzk3vuswfwQAU5wvoulpTW6nZ8="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:vkLkWy4gti8ldk7zm8/GjvYtGj0=
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Bytes: 3378

"Keith Thompson" <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:87a575zvmb.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com...

> > I can't think of any other way to control an ASCII/EBCDIC
> > ANSI X3.64 terminal without language/library support.
>
> But there's no such thing.  I recall looking into this last time we
> discussed this, and ANSI X3.64 is defined in terms of ASCII.

I didn't fully answer this either.

Yes, if you want to be pedantic, the ANSI X3.64 uses the
word ASCII, because they didn't spend any effort considering
that someone might want to do exactly the same thing on an
EBCDIC system - in the future - because there was no such
thing in existence at that time.

But if that committee had spent the effort to consider EBCDIC,
they probably would have reworded the language.

But regardless - if you want to be really pedantic, forget about
ANSI X3.64 completely. I am creating a new standard called
non-ANSI X3.64, which allows either ASCII or EBCDIC,
so any reference to "ASCII" is replaced with "character set"
or any other term that means "ASCII or EBCDIC or maybe
even other things".

I do not believe this is difficult to understand.

I do not believe I have not made myself clear.

However, my perspective may be incorrect, and if you still
don't understand, it would be great if someone could
translate English to English.

I have this problem quite a lot. I don't know why - it's as
clear as day to me. Just like the C90 thing. Obviously I'm
not talking about inventing a time machine and/or sneaking
into the ISO office and changing all their existing copies
of C90 and then all the other copies everywhere in the
world, and all the derivatives too.

That is VERY OBVIOUS to me.

But for whatever reason, my casual use of "update C90"
is treated as if I am about to invent not just a time machine,
but coerce the existing members of the C90 committee to
do what I want.

Which is obviously ridiculous, so "clearly" not what I meant.

And the obvious alternative to the above, was obvious all
along. TO ME.

BFN. Paul.