man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?

[Julian H. Stacey]

> I understand the concerns about licensing, yet I see standards as 
> reference material,

ISO products are not standard when ISO restricts access by charging
fees so they're not freely distributable to all individual programmers
for reference in free software developer communities.

Only draft ISO are freely available.  FreeBSD & Linux & Apache &
RFCs etc do better than ISO, publishing de facto standards as
documentation & source free of charge.


>and the SUS is available free of charge, that's 

Again you fail to post a precise complete URL for free open anonymous
reference.  One might wonder your involvment with open.org/ISO/IEEE.


> Take the political parts up with the respective entities and/or possibly 
> the FreeBSD foundation.

If free source developers co-operate on de facto
standards, ISO may be ignored as an obstruction.


> language, 2nd edition, then getopt() isn't even in my printed book's index.

Yet again: The point is to find the latest specification
of C language "const" Before considering latest getopt().


> > It would be nice to download a new C standard for reference.  Is
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > the newest definition of C free public access ? Is there a URL
> 
> I never bothered to check.  Check the final drafts that are getting 
> voted "becomes standard yes/no" on, they are usually free.

You Never bother to post precise URLs to list, please stop posting.

A reminder for others

I have found this free downloadable C spec
> http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/standards

> Is there a URL newer/ better than what I posted ?

Cheers,
Julian
-- 
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com
 Mail plain text;  Not quoted-printable, Not HTML, Not base 64.
 Reply below text sections not at top, to avoid breaking cumulative context.