Subject: Re: Documentation/languages...
To: Peter Seebach <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: J.T. Conklin <jtc@NetBSD.ORG>
Date: 05/18/1997 11:44:08
> What man page section would language docs go in? I would like to
> see NetBSD be one of the world's only conforming C implementations.
> To do that, we would need to document *every* instance of
> "implementation-defined behavior" in the standard. This is actually
> not very hard, but where would this documentation go?
There is a similar requirement is for POSIX, the POSIX Conformance
Draft or PCD. How about man0?
> Also, does anyone object to C9X alignment when the C9X draft comes
> out? Since NetBSD is one of the systems being used to show that
> strsep() is a good thing, I'd like to migrate it towards being a
> good C9X implementation. (The gcc people are working on this
I have no problems with supporting c9x; although we also need to
maintain support for c89 and even k&r C so users will be able to
compile existing third-party software. Some c9x features, like
<inttypes.h> would be useful now. When will the first public draft be
> Anyway, feedback appreciated. I would be happy to attempt to document
> the implementation defined behavior of our implementation, although
> I'll probably need some help on anything platform-dependant.
Aside from signed/unsigned chars, I hope that all netbsd ports'
operate pretty much the same. I'd say that is one of the advantages
of a single source OS, and something we shouldn't violate lightly.