Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!dogie.macc.wisc.edu!gatech!hubcap!ncrcae!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hp-pcd!hplsla!jima
From: jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Class documentation
Message-ID: <6590289@hplsla.HP.COM>
Date: 9 Oct 89 17:55:38 GMT
References: <662@hsi86.hsi.UUCP>
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Lines: 24

>(Even when class interfaces are standardized, user documentation will
>always be part of the total product.  When the ANSI C standard is
>finally made official, you'll be able to get a copy of the standard
>for a few bucks; but you won't be able to call Microsoft and say, "I'm
>interested in your C compiler's library.  Could you please send me the
>reference manual?")

I won't have to call Microsoft.  I'll just look it up using on-line searches
of their CD-ROM documentation.

I think more and more companies are going to head towards CD-ROMS for 
publishing their software and/or documentation en mass, and what people
will be paying for is a "license to use" with maybe an attached password.

Hopefully, programmers will not continue to be stuck with "shrink-wrap"
licensing that prevents you from even reading about the product before
you buy it.  This really sucks.  Also, I refuse to accept the idea that
the design of a class interface represents a unique marketable product.
This would allow companies to fragment the C++ user community by locking
software writers into a particular vendor's C++ libraries.  Customers and
competitors need to be able to design "work-alike" libraries, or we're 
never going to get anywhere with "software reusability."  C++ customers
need to be able to use the same core set of libraries whether writing on
MS-DOS, un*x, cloniks, portables, transportable, minis, mainframes, or supers.