我是comp.lang.c新闻组的长期订阅者。 最近（过去几年），comp.lang.c订阅者 有一直引用并引用ANSI / ISO C标准文件 来支持他们对标准的解释。 显然，他们正在使用标准文件 作为一种程序员的参考手册。 就个人而言，我发现标准文件 很难阅读，理解和解释。 我觉得有必要咨询comp.std.c新闻组 他们对标准文件的解释。 标准文件是否打算用于普通程序员使用 作为参考手册？ 或者他们主要是供编译器开发人员使用？ 有没有希望标准文件可以修改 ，以使它们对普通C程序员更有用吗？ 有没有她的文件，C程序员应该使用 作为参考除了或代替标准文件？
I am a long time subscriber to the comp.lang.c newsgroup. Recently (over the last few years), comp.lang.c subscribers have been citing and quoting ANSI/ISO C standards documents to support their interpretation of the standards. Evidently, they are using the standards documents as sort of a "programmers'' reference manual". Personally, I find that the standards documents are difficult to read, understand and interpret. I feel compelled to consult the comp.std.c newsgroup for their interpretation of the standards documents. Were the standards documents intended to be used as a reference manual by ordinary programmers? Or were they mainly intended for use by compiler developers? Is there any hope that the standards documents can be revised to make them more useful to ordinary C programmers? Are there other documents that C programmers should use as a reference besides or instead of the standards documents?
推荐答案"，E。 Robert Tisdale写道： .... "E. Robert Tisdale" wrote: .... 普通程序员是否打算使用标准文件作为参考手册？或者主要是是否供编译器开发人员使用？ Were the standards documents intended to be used as a reference manual by ordinary programmers? Or were they mainly intended for use by compiler developers?
它们供有意编写代码的开发人员使用 可以移植到任何符合条件的开发人员实现，以及实现者 对编写符合要求的实现感兴趣。然而，通常情况下，当试图服务于两个不同的目标时，它既没有服务，也没有服务于b $ b，以及如果可以忽略另一个目标的话。我会说它'b 偏向于给予实现者他们需要的东西，让开发人员依赖第三方书来获得更多可读的描述但是，实现者可能会对此有不同的看法。
They were intended for use both by developers interested in writing code that can be ported to any conforming implementation, and by implementors interested in writing conforming implementations. However, as is usually the case when trying to serve two different goals, it serves neither one as well as it would if the other goal could be ignored. I''d say it''s biased in favor of giving implementors what they need, leaving developers to rely on third-party books for more readible descriptions of C. However, implementors might feel differently about that.
在comp.std.c中E. Robert Tisdale< E. *** ***********@jpl.nasa.gov>写道： In comp.std.c E. Robert Tisdale <E.**************@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: 是否打算将标准文件用作普通程序员的参考手册？ Were the standards documents intended to be used as a reference manual by ordinary programmers?
是。我不推荐它作为随意阅读（情节和角色 开发留下了很多不足之处），但委员会非常努力确保它很难确保它平均可以访问（专业） 程序员。 -Larry Jones 我一直忘了那个规则只适用于小人物。 - Calvin
Yes. I don''t recommend it as casual reading (the plot and character development leave a lot to be desired), but the committee tried very hard to ensure that it would be accessible to the average (professional) programmer. -Larry Jones I keep forgetting that rules are only for little nice people. -- Calvin
la ***** *******@ugsplm 写道： la************@ugsplm writes: 是的。我不推荐它作为随意阅读（情节和角色的发展留下了很多不足之处），但委员会非常努力地确保平均可以访问（专业人士） ）程序员。 Yes. I don''t recommend it as casual reading (the plot and character development leave a lot to be desired), but the committee tried very hard to ensure that it would be accessible to the average (professional) programmer.
我使用标准作为我的主要C参考手册，并且我怀疑许多其他常客在clc也这样做。 - Ben Pfaff 电子邮件： bl*@cs.stanford.edu web： http ：//benpfaff
更多推荐
标准参考手册
发布评论