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,c78177ec2e61f4ac
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@shellx.best.com>
Subject: Re: ada and robots
Date: 1997/06/24
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.95.970624083114.9197A-100000@shellx.best.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 252252508
References: <JSA.97Jun19183318@alexandria.organon.com>
 <Pine.SGI.3.95.970619163029.5827A-100000@shellx.best.com>
 <dewar.867078005@merv>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


On 23 Jun 1997, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Brian said
> 
> <<C++ is a very widely used *family-of-languages* which will be with us for
> a long time.  Certainly if I had my druthers, there would be little new C++
> <<
> 
> I don't understand the "family of languages" reference here.

Don't read too much into it. It is just a quip about the elusive nature 
of the meaning of "C++", inspired by years of working with it. I found 
that most C++ code I saw (late 80s and early 90s) really would have been 
best described as VC++, GNU C++, Zortech C++, etc, and these were all 
changing with each release (but not getting closer to each other). 

Yeah, you could argue that the same is true of Ada to some degree, but 
(as Jon pointed out) the quantitative difference is very great. Many 
articles by C++ cognoscenti in that time frame cautioned against the use 
of templates and exceptions in portable code, for example. 

-- Brian