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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,df1a7f1c3c3bc77e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!212.101.4.254.MISMATCH!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.ip-plus.net!newsfeed.ip-plus.net!news.post.ch!not-for-mail From: Martin Krischik Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: An Ada Advice Inquiry Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 08:36:39 +0200 Organization: Swisscom IP+ (post doesn't reflect views of Swisscom) Message-ID: <46401a78$1@news.post.ch> References: <1178448459.256329.28590@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <1178480316.415370.194260@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <463ed042$1@news.post.ch> <1178527820.949652.143060@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> <1g1r9ddu19ka7$.1kq3tc2btm98o.dlg@40tude.net> <1178542830.662912.295270@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> <2825529.4NRNKvsDf2@linux1.krischik.com> <1178573171.037577.54370@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.41.146.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: atlas.ip-plus.net 1178606203 16353 194.41.146.1 (8 May 2007 06:36:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@ip-plus.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 06:36:43 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025) In-Reply-To: <1178573171.037577.54370@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: w01iwt.pnet.ch X-Original-Trace: 8 May 2007 08:36:40 +0200, w01iwt.pnet.ch Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15629 Date: 2007-05-08T08:36:39+02:00 List-Id: Maciej Sobczak schrieb: >> And still AFAIK there is still only >> one C++ compiler to support "export". > > We've been through this already. > Short version: nobody uses "export" so nobody cares whether it's > supported or not. It looks that this subject is occupying the C++ > enemies much more than the actual users of the language. Interesting, > isn't it? But isn't that a catch 22 - no one supports it because not one uses it because no one supports it. And there is no pressure to change because users don't know what they are missing. When I (forced to) moved from IBM C++ to MSC++ I was shocked about the primitive brute force way to instantiate templates in MSC++ which made it almost impossible to separate template-interface from template implementations. The hole template in one big ugly file - something not found in IBM C++ (in fact all IBM C++ templates consisted of three files spec, body, inline body). I am not in favour of export because I am a C++ enemy. I am in favour because I have seen the idea behind export in stunning action. Only the IBM did not even need an extra keyword to implement the idea behind. Martin -- Martin Krischik