From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-Id: <200309120301.h8C31Oj09744@augusta.math.psu.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] ... in the Kingdom of Sources
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 09 Sep 2003 08:34:03 GMT."
             <JOCdnUa8OfYQlsCiXTWJhA@comcast.com>
From: Dan Cross <cross@math.psu.edu>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 23:01:24 -0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 31be0478-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

"Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> writes:
>
> rob pike, esq. wrote:
> > there are two important differences.  first is that (old) ANSI C
> > did not provide any formatted i/o for wchar_t, rendering them
> > essentially useless.
>
> The target clientele at the time insisted that they did not want
> us to specify more than the minimum necessary support, and that
> they would happily invoke the multibyte<->wide conversions when
> necessary.  I remember Plauger relaying that promise.  Not
> surprisingly, as soon as they got the capability they started
> pushing for the missing functions, which became part of a
> normative amendment to the C standard by 1995 (along with mode
> on the stream to control whether automatic conversion is or is
> not applied).

So you're admiting it's a hack?

	- Dan C.