Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!caen!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpl-opus!hpcc05!hpcuhb!hpcllla!hpclisp!hpcljms!brians
From: brians@hpcljms.HP.COM (Brian Sullivan)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: Packing, Ordering, and Rearranging
Message-ID: <77210007@hpcljms.HP.COM>
Date: 12 Oct 90 23:44:27 GMT
References: <1990Sep21.130531.7437@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Calif. Language Lab
Lines: 23

>>>... A standard is useful only if it is widely accepted.  It cannot
>>>become widely accepted without support from compiler writers.  Trying
>>>to ram things down the compiler writers' throats with standards simply
>>>does not work; all it does is eliminate the usefulness of the standard.
>>
>>I offer the Ada language as an absolute counterexample to your argument.
>
>I wasn't aware that Ada was useful.

  Too bad your not aware.  Ada is a far better language that C ever will
be.  Unfortunately it never acquire the critical mass of devoted fanatics,
such as yourself, that is apparently needed for widespread use and approval.
I am quite happy with the precise specification and enforcement of the Ada
standard, where as the C language didn't even evolve into a standard until
quite late in is life.  Unfortunately for ANSI C there was quite alot of
commonly use pratices that made the resultant language less useable that
what might have otherwise been produced, so now we are stuck with a
language that is just a series of compiler-writer hacks.

  I also appears that C++ is heading down the same path, too bad I had
been hoping for better.

        -- Brian --