From 3981919877706862344 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,9a6b7da9ba54eaea X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: f78e5,9a6b7da9ba54eaea X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1993-06-21 21:12:47 PST Xref: gmd.de comp.lang.c++:24865 comp.std.c++:2834 Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.std.c++ Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!netcomsv!netcom.com!rfg From: rfg@netcom.com (Ronald F. Guilmette) Subject: Re: C++ Language Extensions Message-ID: Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) References: <1993Jun14.150349.778@udel.edu> <1993Jun15.214156.3591@mole-end.matawan.nj.us> Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 03:54:10 GMT Lines: 35 In article <1993Jun15.214156.3591@mole-end.matawan.nj.us> mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us writes: >In article <1993Jun14.150349.778@udel.edu>, carroll@hercules.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Carroll) writes: >> In article rfg@netcom.com (Ronald F. Guilmette) writes: >> >I find it a particularly telling comment that (in the context of an ANSI/ISO >> >standardization effort) a strong committment to the plain and simple >> >standardization of existing practice is considered to be a view held only >> >by radical extremists. >> >> It *would* be telling, if it were a comment given by nearly any other >> standardization process. The problem with saying that about C++ is, at >> the time the standardization process started, there was virtually no >> existing practice to build on! The design of the language was not, and >> still is not, finished. ... > >These extensions are not extensions in the usual sense of the word. They >are the completion of one or another major part of the language. Humm... well... I guess a Rolls-Royce is just a Volkswagon which has been "completed". :-) All I can say is that I have some hope that all those folks who are working feverishly to build a Rolls-Royce (ahem... I mean to "complete" the Volks- wagon) will occasionally stop and remember that a lot of people are more than happy with Volkswagons. They work today, and they are economical to operate. Now don't get me wrong. I like a good Rolls-Royce as much as the next guy, but given my immediate needs, I'll take the Volkswagon today, rather than the Rolls-Royce in (maybe) five years. -- -- Ronald F. Guilmette ------------------------------------------------------ ------ domain address: rfg@netcom.com --------------------------------------- ------ uucp address: ...!uunet!netcom.com!rfg -------------------------------