Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!pasteur!galileo.berkeley.edu!jbuck
From: jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Address of member function
Message-ID: <29322@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 29 Oct 90 18:45:32 GMT
References: <1399@carol.fwi.uva.nl>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck)
Lines: 16

In article <1399@carol.fwi.uva.nl>, delft@fwi.uva.nl (Andre van Delft) writes:
> ("ANSI-C++" should have been "AT&T C++, 2.0", of course.) 

No, it should be "Ellis and Stroustrup"; their book, "The Annotated C++
Reference Manual", has been adopted by the ANSI C++ committee as the base
document for the standard.  It specifies many things not supported by AT&T
C++ 2.0, and even a couple of minor things that AT&T C++ 2.1 doesn't support
(though it is roughly 2.1).  When I see someone use the phrase "ANSI-C++"
here that is my understanding of their meaning, although the question "What
does the E&S book say?" is more accurate.

The behavior of AT&T 2.0 (cfront) is definitely not the standard, even
according to AT&T (especially since 2.1 is out now).
-- 
Joe Buck
jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu	 {uunet,ucbvax}!galileo.berkeley.edu!jbuck