Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!att!dptg!pegasus!psrc
From: psrc@pegasus.ATT.COM (Paul S. R. Chisholm)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Standardized classes (was: Class documentation)
Summary: what's holding up standardized classes
Keywords: c++, class, library
Message-ID: <4152@pegasus.ATT.COM>
Date: 10 Oct 89 13:06:57 GMT
References: <600@hsi86.hsi.UUCP> <4132@pegasus.ATT.COM> <662@hsi86.hsi.UUCP> <674@hsi86.hsi.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 28

In article <674@hsi86.hsi.UUCP>, wright@hsi.UUCP (Gary Wright) writes:
> C++ is in desperate need of a standard data structures library so that
> programmers do not need to post to the net to see if anybody has a
> {list, graph, stack} class they could use.

True enough.  Everybody who's involved with C++, as a user or as a
developer of the language (including Dr. Stoustrup), realizes this.
The language is still missing two features that would make such classes
much more usable:  parameterized types and exception handling.  There
are some locally-developed (and AT&T proprietary, sorry) classes that
simulate these features with the preprocessor; they're useful, but
kludgy.  (No offense, Rob!  It's the best you could do with the
language in it's current state.)

This raises a very serious question:  do we standardize on the useful
features first, and then take advantage of them?  Or do we standardize
on the classes, and carry the warts forever?  Standardization efforts
will be starting in a few months, and these disputes will be tough to
resolve.  Either way, Dr. Stroustrup is extremely reluctant to
distribute anything new unless it's right the first time; no one will
every let him take anything back.  It's a fine line.

> Gary Wright 					...!uunet!hsi!wright
> Health Systems International                    wright@hsi.com

Paul S. R. Chisholm, AT&T Bell Laboratories
att!pegasus!psrc, psrc@pegasus.att.com, AT&T Mail !psrchisholm
I'm not speaking for the company, I'm just speaking my mind.