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: 109fba,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: fjh@murlibobo.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: Exceptions as objects (was Re: What is wrong with OO ?)
Date: 1997/02/08
Message-ID: <5did8t$mbk@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 215344246
references: <5acjtn$5uj@news3.digex.net> <E3I8GL.AuH@research.att.com>
 <32dd9fc8.262114963@news.sprynet.com> <yf3sp3y9ur6.fsf@sabi.demon.co.uk>
 <E49vLo.AzB@ecf.toronto.edu> <yf3lo9iqzhz.fsf@sabi.demon.co.uk>
 <5cu43v$jkn@nntpa.cb.lucent.com> <5d93d3$nhs$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
 <5dds5b$gcs@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
 <01bc14ab$3ce476e0$752d54c7@vbykov.hip.cam.org>
 <5def36$rjd@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
 <01bc1513$e030fcc0$752d54c7@vbykov.hip.cam.org>
organization: Comp Sci, University of Melbourne
newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng
Date: 1997-02-08T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Vassili Bykov" <vbykov@cam.org> writes:

>I didn't mean to be dense--I said that only because if we extend the
>meaning of "standard library" to include standard macros always known to
>the compiler then what is the difference between "part of the library" and
>"part of the language"?

The difference is that things that are part of the library are things
that a user can program user-defined alternatives.  For example,
in C, printf() is part of the standard library, and you can write a
my_printf() function that does similar things to printf() (and
is perhaps implemented as a layer on top of printf()).  On the
other hand, it's not possible to do the equivalent for Pascal's
write statement or for C's for loops, because these are part of
the language proper, not the standard library.

--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>   |  "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>   |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3         |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.