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