From 4282102955879626348 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d733139e7969f81d X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: f78e5,d733139e7969f81d X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-25 16:11:56 PST Newsgroups: comp.std.c++,comp.lang.c++ Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!ames!pacbell.com!amdahl!netcomsv!netcom.com!rfg From: rfg@netcom.com (Ronald F. Guilmette) Subject: Re: How relevant is ANSI C++? (Re: Is STL a good standard?) Message-ID: Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) References: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 1994 22:17:27 GMT Lines: 16 Xref: bga.com comp.std.c++:4588 comp.lang.c++:30424 In article tmb@idiap.ch writes: > >C++ compiler writing is already a nightmare. And the Ellis and >Detlefs proposal is not all that hard to implement. I'm going to keep repeating this as long as people here keep giving me valid excuses to do so. _Everthing_ is `easy' as long as you are not the schmuck who has to implement it. -- -- Ron Guilmette, Sunnyvale, CA ---------- RG Consulting ------------------- ---- domain addr: rfg@netcom.com ----------- Purveyors of Compiler Test ---- ---- uucp addr: ...!uunet!netcom!rfg ------- Suites and Bullet-Proof Shoes -