Subject: Re: Documentation/languages...
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Mike Long <email@example.com>
Date: 05/18/1997 23:34:47
>Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 15:57:03 -0500 (CDT)
>From: Peter Seebach <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>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?
c(7) or isoc9x(7) or iso_c_9x(7). Section 7 is where you throw
manpages that don't fit anywhere else.
>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
That would depend on what the differences are.
>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.
Well, we appreciate documentation, too. :-)
Mike Long <email@example.com> http://www.shore.net/~mikel
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands,
hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken