对于许多问题，答案似乎在“标准”中找到。然而，我们在哪里找到它呢?最好是网上。
谷歌有时会让人觉得毫无意义，尤其是对于C标准，因为它们淹没在编程论坛上的讨论洪流中。
首先，因为这些是我现在正在搜索的，哪里有好的在线资源:
C89 C99 C11 C + + 98 c++ 03 c++ 11 c++ 14 c++ 17
当前回答
C99和c++ 03标准可从Wiley以书籍的形式获得:
Amazon上的c++标准 C亚马逊标准
此外，如前所述，未来标准的工作草案通常可从委员会网站获得:
c++委员会网站 C委员会网站
C-201x草案是N1336, c++ 0x草案是N3225。
其他回答
ANSI C标准草案(又名C.89)的文本可在网上获得。这是在ISO C标准(C.90)接受之前由ANSI委员会标准化的，所以章节的编号不同(ANSI章节2到4大致对应ISO章节5到7)，尽管内容(应该)基本上相同。
草案链接:
c++ 11(+编辑修复):N3337 HTML, PDF
c++ 14(+编辑修复):N4140 HTML, PDF
c11n1570(文本)
C99 N1256
标准草案在批准和出版前分发征求意见。 请注意，工作草案不是当前生效的标准，也不是确切的已发布标准
您可能会发现c++ 0x的国际标准草案很有用。
ISO C和c++标准非常昂贵。另一方面，INCITS重新出版的费用要低得多。http://www.techstreet.com/网站上的PDF文档售价30美元 (搜寻INCITS/ISO/ iec14882:2003)。
也有硬拷贝版本。请查阅Wiley出版的英国标准协会版本。
虽然不是一个实际的标准，但ISO C (C89/90)有一个修正案，称为C94/95，或规范附录1。它被集成到C99中，尽管Clang等编译器允许您在命令行上指定-std=c94。ISO/IEC 9899:1990/Amd 1:1995可以从SAI GLOBAL以高价购买(PDF或硬拷贝)。
http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/The_C_Standard
该文件的摘要可以在这里找到。
When the (then draft) ANSI C Standard was being considered for adoption of an International Standard in 1990, there were several objections because it didn't address internationalization issues. Because the Standard had already been several years in the making, it was agreed that a few changes would be made to provide the basis (for example, the functions in subclause 7.10.7 were added), and work would be carried out separately to provide proper internationalization of the Standard. This work has culminated in Normative Addendum 1. Normative Addendum 1 embodies C's reaction to both the limitations and promises of international character sets. Digraphs and the header were meant to improve the appearance of C programs written in national variants of ISO 646 without, e.g., { or } characters. On the other end of the spectrum, the facilities connected to and extend the old Standard's barely adequate basis into a complete and consistent set of utilities for handling wide characters and multibyte strings. This document summarizes Normative Addendum 1. It is intended to quickly inform readers who are already familiar with the Standard; it does not, and cannot, introduce the complex subject matter behind NA1, nor can it replace the original document as a reference manual. (Nevertheless, it tries to be as accurate as possible, and its author would like to hear about any errors or omissions.)
http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/na1.html
