4 ms·
https://www.sensitiveresearch.com/Archive/CharCodeHist/X3.4-1963/index.html https://www.sensitiveresearch.com/Archive/CharCodeHist/X3.4-... has the full 1963 st
by Someone 3y ago
https://www.sensitiveresearch.com/Archive/CharCodeHist/X3.4-1963/index.html https://www.sensitiveresearch.com/Archive/CharCodeHist/X3.4-... has the full 1963 standard (12 jpg’s)
I find it interesting to read the section on considerations.
They, for example, mention that COBOL is supported, but ALGOL isn’t, explain how the standard could be extended for use for “European alphabets” (they could use the 5 values after Z and the one before A for additional letters) or “base 12 numeric digits” (to support pre-decimalization British monetary values)
- bhaak 3y ago> how the standard could be extended for use for “European alphabets” (they could use the 5 values after Z and the one before A for additional letters) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII#7-bit_codes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII#7-bit_codes They not only could, they actually did. Now you know why C has trigraphs.