From -5589957726177359555 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: 1993-06-22 13:19:35 PST Xref: gmd.de comp.lang.c++:24933 comp.std.c++:2848 Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!princeton!allegra!alice!ark From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: C++ Language Extensions Message-ID: <25815@alice.att.com> Date: 22 Jun 93 18:59:46 GMT Article-I.D.: alice.25815 References: <1993Jun15.214156.3591@mole-end.matawan.nj.us> <25807@alice.att.com> <1993Jun22.162345.18549@ucc.su.OZ.AU> Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP () Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ Lines: 15 In article <1993Jun22.162345.18549@ucc.su.OZ.AU> maxtal@physics.su.OZ.AU (John Max Skaller) writes: > of course, removing features is defined by the committee as > requiring an extension proposal :-) > For example, I'd like to have nested functions. > Just cant understand why removing a restriction against > them has to be considered an extension--- I want to > simplify the language not add a feature ;-) I rest my case. -- --Andrew Koenig ark@research.att.com