From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
To: Joe Buck <jbuck@Synopsys.COM>
Cc: mark@markmitchell.com, egcs@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: strict_prototypes_lang_c 
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 09:55:00 -0000
Message-id: <23983.913744414@hurl.cygnus.com>
References: <199812151738.JAA12506@yamato.synopsys.com>
X-SW-Source: 1998-12/msg00526.html

  In message < 199812151738.JAA12506@yamato.synopsys.com >you write:
  > Note that the -ansi flag enables trigraphs; it doesn't seem too confusing
  > to tell users to use -ansi to get more standard behavior (though -ansi
  > seems a bit chauvinistic when -iso would be more meaningful to the
  > international community).
Yea.  That does make the trigraph situation easier to swallow :-)

  > Question: are there users out there who have trouble entering any of the
  > standard C characters from their keyboards, because they have a 7-bit
  > keyboard with a national character set that does not have, say, the { or }
  > characters?  I have some sympathy for RMS's position: trigraphs are an
  > extremely ugly solution to a problem that no longer exists.
Dunno.


  > Another question: does enabling trigraphs do any potential harm to users
  > that are unaware of trigraphs?  I suppose you could accidentally include
  > a trigraph pattern in a string without knowing it, but it seems like a
  > low-probability event.
It can happen.  There is an option to warn about tri-graph sequences
-Wtrigraph.  However, it is only enabled when trigraphs are enabled.

jeff