From: sjw <simon.j.wright@mac.com>
Subject: Re: C++0x : no 'concepts'
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 12:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
Date: 2009-09-09T12:26:51-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <af5ff457-9e9b-4b9b-91ec-5312b670e04e@m11g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: d6e736ac-88a2-48b1-a7ec-8538d8972b9e@e4g2000prn.googlegroups.com
On Sep 9, 3:49 pm, Adam Beneschan <a...@irvine.com> wrote:
> (Not to mention that if they're still working on it with less than
> four months to go in this year, the 0x is likely to become an
> embarrassment anyway. At least with Ada 0Y, even though the final
> draft was a year or two later than originally planned, the year still
> had a 0 in the third position.)
The '0x' is in fact a hint that you should be thinking hex here.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-09 19:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-09 11:44 C++0x : no 'concepts' Martin
2009-09-09 12:12 ` Georg Bauhaus
2009-09-09 12:15 ` Martin
2009-09-09 12:39 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2009-09-09 14:47 ` Georg Bauhaus
2009-09-09 15:42 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2009-09-09 14:49 ` Adam Beneschan
2009-09-09 19:26 ` sjw [this message]
2009-09-10 0:16 ` wwilson
2009-09-10 0:45 ` Keith Thompson
2009-09-10 23:36 ` Stephen Leake
2009-09-11 4:36 ` wwilson
2009-09-11 10:10 ` John McCabe
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox