Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpda!hpcupt1!jamiller
From: jamiller@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Jim Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: Re: character array initialization
Message-ID: <52390004@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com>
Date: 20 Nov 90 19:13:21 GMT
References: <39503@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Lines: 29


>programmer learning curve for there to be a significant overlap in ANSI-C and
>C++, but there is already divergence, so why not attempt to improve things?
>--
>David Masterson					Consilium, Inc.


Because C code is being brought into C++ wholesale in some cases.
An earlier thread *seemed* to complain about ANY divergence from ANSI C or
maybe even K&R I C (at least that's what I felt some comments said).  

IMO, anything that would give people (managers or programmers) reasons NOT
to adopt C++ should be avoided.  These reasons, mind you, need not
be valid, just there.  One big reason is/would be the dreaded
"incompatability", just there being such things (never mind they might
not happen) keeps people away. 

The reason I supported the  char x[4]="abcd";  incompatability is because
is is *usally* an error.  If it were not, I'd be against it.  Even so I
would be willing to support not making the change if it seems that anyone
is really bothered about it (by "really" I mean code is affected).  I would
also be forced to back off by anyone pushing the "no incompatability"
banner in the interest of acceptance.

   jim - do I have to be consistant in my arguments? - miller
   jamiller@hpmpeb7.cup.hp.com
   (a.k.a James A. Miller; Jim the JAM; stupid; @!?$$!; ... )
   Anything I say will be used against me ...
   But my company doesn't know or approve or condone anything of mine here.