From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 3 Aug 93 21:56:04 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!ajpo.sei.cmu.edu!wellerd@ucbvax.Berke
ley.EDU  (David Weller)
Subject: Re: C++ is a preprocessor (was Admiral Tuttle Revisited ...)
Message-ID: <1993Aug3.175604.259@sei.cmu.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <69976@mimsy.umd.edu> alex@cs.umd.edu (Alex Blakemore) writes:
>In article <9307250105.aa25189@dsc.blm.gov> cjames@DSC.BLM.GOV (Colin James 06
21) writes:
>> on the basis that C++ is not a preprocessor, but that C++ can
>> be a preprocessor depending on the implementation. 
>
>this statement shows a certain lack of understanding.
>

I've mentioned this privately to a few people, but I'll do it
publicly to prevent further occurrences.

I sent an e-mail message to Mr. James covering two points 
regarding the message you've responded to, they were:
	1) His misconceptions
	2) Asking him to not post further comments until he
		was a little more "enlightened"
He responded by calling my next three layers of management and
pointing out that I was "posing" as a representative of the
AJPO and was being nasty to him (Which I did neither).  

I wish to caution others that may respond in such a manner to be
careful.

Let's just drop this subject -- this horse has been
thoroughly kicked.
-- 
type My_Disclaimer is new Standard.Disclaimer with record
	AJPO, SEI : Cognizance := Disavow_All_Knowledge;
end record;--)