Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!leech
From: leech@Apple.COM (Jonathan Patrick Leech)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: C++ 2.0 pricing (AT&T loses.)
Message-ID: <32971@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 8 Jul 89 10:04:21 GMT
References: <2510@yunexus.UUCP> <6590186@hplsla.HP.COM>
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 29
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Keywords:

In article <6590186@hplsla.HP.COM> jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock) writes:
>I think one area that needs to be re-thunk is C++ usage in universities.
>Unix became widely distributed though the support of universities, many
>computer vendors heavily discount or donate their machines in order to
>secure a university presence, etc.  I'd like to see an approach taken that
>ensures a lively presence of C++ in universities.  I think g++ is useful in
>that regard, but not sufficient.

    AT&T did pretty much the same thing when the commercialized Unix
(source absurdly expensive, no good terms for universities) as they're
repeating with C++ now.  Considering what this got them (Sun, among
others :-), you might think they would reconsider.

    As far as non-mainstream machines goes, case in point: the UNC
Pixel-Planes project (which I work on the other 9 months of the year)
has several people wanting to do development in C++ for the new custom
MIMD machine being built.  Without source to 2.0, I don't see it
happening.  There just aren't the resources to support g++.

    Similarly, I was able to do a cfront port to A/UX (hardly an
operating environment likely to be draw commercial C++ support soon
:-) for another graphics team at UNC while located on the other side
of the country, because of the easy of porting a source->source
compiler.
--
    Jon Leech (leech@apple.com)
    Apple Integrated Systems
    __@/