Markus Kuhn wrote:
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote on 1998-10-08 19:25 UTC:
This is not the right standard for a delay function; that's a much more OS-specific operation and belongs in an OS standard like POSIX.
The distinction of what belongs into a programming language standard and what belongs into an OS standard is generally pretty arbitrary and based mostly on historic accidents.
Can I suggest a way to output? Historically, the C Standard library have been partly defined by the specs of the C language, and partly by the specs for ???ix. This is even true for time (time_t, timezones), as we all know here. This will be true of the results of our cogitations, any way we take them: effectively, the specs for C ought to be *very* compatible with the current state of Posix (and beyond, SUS2). What will be part of the C standard, and what will not, will be determined by the C committee, as I cannot see any task for which it is more aimed at! And the rest of the proposal ought to go in OS standards like POSIX. So I do not think Markus should refrain himself to propose a delay function to the C committee (betting on the desires of the Commitee is the safest way to produce wrong specs, IMHO). Antoine