From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 10a146,a03ae7f4e53958e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,a03ae7f4e53958e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: fa0ae,a03ae7f4e53958e1
X-Google-Attributes: gidfa0ae,public
X-Google-Thread: fac41,a03ae7f4e53958e1
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a03ae7f4e53958e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,a03ae7f4e53958e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8775b19e3c68a5dc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 114809,a03ae7f4e53958e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public
From: Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Which language pays most? Smalltalk, not C++ nor Java.
Date: 1997/12/29
Message-ID: <34A7BD96.47200066@acm.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 311034418
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <199712121931.LAA25389@sirius.infonex.com>
 <67iipp$ktj$1@darla.visi.com> <882756127snz@genesis.demon.co.uk>
 <34A14C27.57C0@min.net> <67rjb3$pfb$1@brie.direct.ca>
 <34A50CAA.54AA@netup.cl> <dewar.883284068@merv> <34A7B45C.403B@min.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Who? Me? Organized?
Newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.perl.misc,comp.lang.ada,comp.edu
Date: 1997-12-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


John Porter wrote:
> 
> Robert Dewar wrote:
> > OK, so your compiler can compile memfoo without compiling. Wunderbar! But
> > that does NOT mean that you can actually go ahead and call a routine memfoo
> > if the standard forbids it. To do so would be incompetent programming.
> 
> So now a "language" is not defined by the compiler -- or even by the
> preprocessor+compiler+linker+etc, as some have it...
> I am forbidden by a piece of paper from calling a function 'memfoo'!
> 
> John Porter
> jporter@logicon.com

I would put it in a more positive light. You are promised that
programs that don't call a function "memfoo" and meet some other
conditions WILL compile with any correct C compiler, not just the
current version of the compiler you are using today.

Patricia