Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Good hash for pointers Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 15:17:55 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 41 Message-ID: <87bk3xzyi4.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> References: <86fru6gsqr.fsf@linuxsc.com> <8634q5hjsp.fsf@linuxsc.com> <86le3wfsmd.fsf@linuxsc.com> <86ed9ofq14.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20240605005916.00001b33@yahoo.com> <86a5jzmle1.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20240605195905.00002484@yahoo.com> <86y17ilm4k.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20240606110009.00001096@yahoo.com> <86zfrkj93b.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20240617123926.00006a12@yahoo.com> <86ed8ujg7j.fsf@linuxsc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 00:17:56 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="14c46e9d4441e9b6d7e573ea203ad727"; logging-data="1632188"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+1ews7KDfYSDNGrEsLCSFY" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:zGJTPez6Czqk/9SD3PSpcy7kqH0= sha1:pQN75wB+Z5glLPKfRZKNXPsuuGI= Bytes: 3535 Tim Rentsch writes: > Michael S writes: >> On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 00:56:40 -0700 >> Tim Rentsch wrote: >> >>> I don't know why you say that. C was an ANSI standard before it >>> was an ISO standard. Or is it that you think that the language >>> Malcolm is intent on using does not conform to C90/C89/ANSI C? >> >> All I wanted to point by this comment is that ANSI recognizes ISO/IEC >> 9899:2018 as their current C Standard and probably will recognize the >> next ISO C Standard pretty soon. For that reason I think that names like >> C89 or C90 are preferable (to ANSI C) when we want to refer to this >> particular variant of the language. > > I see. So it isn't that you think "ANSI C" is wrong, just > that it might be misleading or that C89 or C90 is preferable. > Personally I would be surprised if someone used "ANSI C" to > mean anything other than C89/C90, but certainly other people > could have a different reaction. The term "ANSI C" almost universally refers to C89/C90. But someone not familiar with the term might expect it to mean "the C standard endorsed by ANSI", which is currently C17. The term "ANSI C" started out as a way to refer to the newly standardized language, distinguishing it from pre-standard versions like the one documented in K&R1. I don't necessarily complain when someone uses the phrase "ANSI C" to mean C89/C90, but I try to avoid it myself in favor of "C89" or "C90". Hmm. It occurs to me that "K&R C", which usually refers to the language defined in K&R1, is also potentially ambiguous. I'm not going to worry about it too much. (One C compiler uses a "-ansic" command-line option to cause it to attempt to conform to C99.) -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */