Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pantor!richard
From: richard@pantor.UUCP (Richard Sargent)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Computer Language July/89 Editorial
Message-ID: <19.UUL1.3#5109@pantor.UUCP>
Date: 25 Jul 89 22:37:37 GMT
Organization: Pansophic Systems Inc, Graphics Product Company
Lines: 24

Hello,

I was quite take aback to find the following quote in the lead editorial
of this, usually good, magazine.

J.D. Hildebrand, Editor writes:
"The downside of standardization is that it tends to stifle evolution
 and the adoption of valuable new features. The slowness of C compilers
 to accomodate C++'s handful of new keywords is a case in point.
 C implementations cannot simultaneously take advantage of object-oriented
 programming's benefits and maintain compatibility with the ANSI standard."

Correct me if I am wrong (I am sure you will :-), but I had the impression
that "accomodating C++'s *handful* of new keywords" is what makes a C++
compiler rather than a C compiler.

I am hard-pressed to imagine how one might effectively make use of C++'s
object-oriented features without needing to "go all the way" and use a
C++ compiler. [Yes, I am aware of various means for implementing object-
oriented capabilities using C. They require considerable effort on the
part of the developer; effort better spent solving the problem.]

Richard Sargent                   Internet: richard@pantor.UUCP
Systems Analyst                   UUCP:     uunet!pantor!richard