Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!husc6!endor!siegel
From: siegel@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: C++ for the Mac
Message-ID: <2371@husc6.harvard.edu>
Date: 5 Aug 89 15:34:07 GMT
References: <2278@husc6.harvard.edu> <786@cbnewsk.ATT.COM> <4400@tekred.CNA.TEK.COM>
Sender: news@husc6.harvard.edu
Reply-To: siegel@endor.UUCP (Rich Siegel)
Organization: Symantec Language Products Group
Lines: 29

In article <4400@tekred.CNA.TEK.COM> jasons@frosty.CNA.TEK.COM (Jason Scheck) writes:
>I just got my Think C 4.0 upgrade notice, and found it to be somewhat
>confusing.  I quote the last two lines of one of the paragraphs in the
>letter.
>
>> by Apple Computer.  The syntax is based on C++, and is upwardly
>> compatible with C++.
>
>The last sentence gets me.  From what has been set on this newsgroup,
>Think C doesn't support operator overloading,  among other C++
>features.  So how is it that its _syntax_ is compatible with C++,
>without having its features.  For instance, if I give it the text:

	You're misinterpreting, I think. "Upward compatible" means that
if you write a program in THINK C, you'll be able to compile with a C++
compiler, not that you can compile C++ programs with THINK C.

		--Rich
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Rich Siegel
 Staff Software Developer
 Symantec Corporation, Language Products Group
 Internet: siegel@endor.harvard.edu
 UUCP: ..harvard!endor!siegel

"When it comes to my health, I think of my body as a temple - or at least
a moderately well-managed Presbyterian youth center." - Emo Phillips

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~