From -1447083869816053044
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f78e5,d7194cd08c8b2eab
X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public
From: clamage@Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Clamage)
Subject: Re: Access control
Date: 1995/07/06
Message-ID: <3tgupa$1fr@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 105744479
references: <3tg1cr$adq@bmdhh222.bnr.ca>
organization: Sun Microsystems Inc.
reply-to: clamage@Eng.Sun.COM
newsgroups: comp.std.c++

In article adq@bmdhh222.bnr.ca, dbinder@bnr.ca (David Binderman) writes:
>
>cfront 3 likes it, and g++ 2.7.0 likes it. So using the compiler majority
>vote rule, its a bug in Metaware.
>
>Even if it isn't a bug in Metaware, n - 1 compilers like the code,
>so that code is de-facto legal.

Is this a joke? Did I miss a smiley somewhere? Or am I just too grouchy
today?

After all, this newsgroup is comp.STD.c++. We should refer to the C++
language definition, and not the behavior of selected compilers,
when discussing the correct interpretation of source code.
---
Steve Clamage, stephen.clamage@eng.sun.com