From: rjh@cpax.org.uk   
      
   On 02/12/2025 23:33, Keith Thompson wrote:   
   > Philipp Klaus Krause  writes:   
   >> Am 02.12.25 um 08:31 schrieb David Brown:   
   >>> But in days gone by if anyone ever needed to use trigraphs for C   
   >>> programming, then I am sure they would happily switch to a   
   >>> word-based language given half a chance.  I find "{ }" nicer than   
   >>> "begin end", but I'd pick "begin end" over "??< ??>" any day!   
   >>   
   >> AFAIK, there never was a real user of trigraphs (unless you count   
   >> compiler test suites). AFAIK for all real-world use digraphs were   
   >> sufficient.   
   >   
   > There have been actual uses of trigraphs.  Richard Heathfield posted   
   > this on this newsgroup in 2010 :   
   >   
   >      Yes, they are still needed, for example in some mainframe   
   >      environments.  They make the code look astoundingly ugly, but   
   >      they do at least make it work. It is not uncommon for "normal"   
   >      C code to be written and tested on PCs, then run through   
   >      a conversion program to replace monographs with trigraphs   
   >      where required before transfer to the mainframe for final   
   >      testing. That way, you get the readability where it matters,   
   >      and the usability where /that/ matters.   
      
   Nostalgia ain't what it used to be, but yes, I did indeed write   
   that, and yes, such workarounds are still used.   
      
   > But trigraphs have been removed in C23.   
      
   Then so, in some mainframe environments, have curly braces. I   
   suppose their fix will be to not adopt C23.   
      
   --   
   Richard Heathfield   
   Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk   
   "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999   
   Sig line 4 vacant - apply within   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)