nostr:npub1wc2kznjw6kldwzz8eedr9pf208waa8ww3fjsqk0nz4rdv8q663qswt4sk7 nostr:npub17jqvr0kp48sjwctcvhre8lk87yr5qqe726zkunwq2uhtd35wdx4sgkv996 

> as described in the ISO standard is a piece of shit.

This is my point.

> If you have another language in mind, this isn't the C language.

By this argument, there are no C compilers, as all of them fail to implement one piece or another and all of them have extensions.  By this argument, the first C compiler didn't compile C, but some other language, and Unix was not written in C but in some other language.  It's a terrible argument, the equivalent of walking into a wall face-first because the wall wasn't on the map.  ISO doesn't create reality:  the standard's purpose is to enumerate the behaviors that you can generally rely on most compilers evincing.  It is a mistake to treat it otherwise.

If Ken says his C compiler is a C compiler, I'm taking his word over anyone in any standardization body.
plan_9_c_compiler.pdf

https://freespeechextremist.com/media/81c5c0f3-5ee2-40ce-b36b-7e137fc36d5a/plan_9_c_compiler.pdf?name=plan_9_c_compiler.pdf