JON@wehi.dn.mu.oz (Jon Eaves) (02/12/90)
Thanks to all those who responded to my query.
And for all those who sent me mail asking me for the answer....
It appears that Think C 3.0 is NOT ANSI compatible, however 4.0 is..
NB I did not get any definative state from Symantec.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Eaves
life (n) : A terminal, sexually transmitted disease.
ACSnet ( jon@wehi.dn.mu.oz )
UUCP ( uunet!munnari!wehi.dn.mu.oz!jon )
Internet ( jon%wehi.dn.mu.oz@uunet.uu.net )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------casseres@apple.com (David Casseres) (02/13/90)
In article <4890@wehi.dn.mu.oz> JON@wehi.dn.mu.oz (Jon Eaves) writes: > And for all those who sent me mail asking me for the answer.... > > It appears that Think C 3.0 is NOT ANSI compatible, however 4.0 is.. > > NB I did not get any definative state from Symantec. Well, it's not quite that simple. I'm surprised that apparently nobody looked at Symantec's 4.0 manual. On Page 1, under "What is THINK C?" it says: "The standard C libraries include all the functions specified in the ANSI C standard, as well as some additional Unix operating system functions." But on page 10, under "More ANSI C Compatibility" it says "Many new language features in this release make THINK C more compatible with the ANSI C standard. Although THINK C is close to the standard, it is not conformant as defined in the standard. The remaining issues either are of little significance or would require fundamental changes to THINK C. For more information on ANSI compatibility, read ... Chapter 57." Chapter 57 is the language reference section. It specifically mentions a few differences with ANSI, but it doesn't say whether those are the only differences. To be sure, you'd have to know a lot more about the ANSI standard than I do. It's a real nice C development system, in any case. David Casseres Exclaimer: Hey!