From 1392475768282173163 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,9a6b7da9ba54eaea X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1993-07-07 10:24:30 PST Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!att!allegra!alice!ark From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: C++ Language Extensions Message-ID: <25957@alice.att.com> Date: 7 Jul 93 14:29:18 GMT Article-I.D.: alice.25957 References: <25936@alice.att.com> <25939@alice.att.com> <21cgc4$l1@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP () Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ Lines: 16 In article <21cgc4$l1@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr) writes: > Do you plan to remove destructors and unary ~ from the language? I think > it's too late to object to use of ~. There is a new keyword, `compl,' that is a synonym for ~. I thought that was fine for unary ~ because it isn't used too often, but that it was ugly for destructors. I therefore tried to convince the committee that it would be a good idea to use ! as a synonym for ~ in destructors, but was unsuccessful. I also think it is unlikely that the committee will agree to any new uses of operator symbols on the national-character list. -- --Andrew Koenig ark@research.att.com