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: 103376,53c7a24d13241b98 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: William Clodius Subject: Re: Standadised OO Language Date: 1998/02/13 Message-ID: <34E4689F.3F54@lanl.gov>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 324775986 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <34E2D3D9.B2F1F398@adelaide.on.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Los Alamos National Lab Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-02-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Jon S Anthony wrote: > > > I've heard (a rumor) that within the last couple of months (maybe > December) the latest draft C++ proposal (not the old one that was > laying around for the last 2-3 years) was accepted. I don't know if > this is really true and if so if it is ANSI or ISO. > I sometimes follow the comp.std.c++ newsgroup. On jointly developed standards ANSI approval is usually conditional on ISO approval. The standardization committees late last year submitted a draft for the final stages of the ISO approval process. The submission was approved unaminously, and, because the ISO members usually rely on their representatives on the low level committees for their opinions on the draft, unaminous approval probably indicates that the final stage will not be controversial. However, even if it is not controversial, it can be time consuming (I believe that the ISO mislaid the original C++ paperwork delaying things by a couple of months, and ISO approval is often conditional on some minor changes), so that it will likely be late this year when it is officially published. -- William B. Clodius Phone: (505)-665-9370 Los Alamos Nat. Lab., NIS-2 FAX: (505)-667-3815 PO Box 1663, MS-C323 Group office: (505)-667-5776 Los Alamos, NM 87545 Email: wclodius@lanl.gov