Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!rex!ames!vsi1!octopus!sjsumcs!horstman
From: horstman@mathcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: namespace (rethought & reiterated)
Message-ID: <1991Feb7.064950.5988@mathcs.sjsu.edu>
Date: 7 Feb 91 06:49:50 GMT
References: <4e2Gwz9f@cs.psu.edu> <1991Feb6.155227.553@mathcs.sjsu.edu> <1991Feb6.222339.17017@cbnewsm.att.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.
Lines: 28

In article <1991Feb6.222339.17017@cbnewsm.att.com> gregk@cbnewsm.att.com (gregory.p.kochanski) writes:
>In article <1991Feb6.155227.553@mathcs.sjsu.edu> horstman@mathcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann) writes:
>>I for one wish that the ANSI C++ committee had the courage to address 
>>these issues and do these cleanups [I have lots more to suggest] once
>>and for all, no matter how much C code they break.
>>
>>But the mantra "it will 
>>break gobs of old code" can easily frustrate all discussion. 
>
>1) I don't know how big the existing base of C++ code is, but I'm not
>volunteering to spend the rest of my life updating it because of
>unnecessary incompatibilities.  Perhaps Mr. Horstmann is.
>
I am not sure how wise it is to turn to C++ TODAY if one is unwilling to
live with a changing language. 

I had to do LOTS of reworking with "extern C" when type-safe linkage came out.
I still have some "assignments to this" in some old code and expect to have to
redo them when my next compiler won't support them anymore. 

That is just fine with me. I know C++ is currently an evolving language
and I know what I am getting into by using it now. 

Anyway, the compiler designers can easily support "C++ Ver.1", "Ver.2.0",
"Ver.2.1" flags for a while, just as they now have "ANSI C" and "K&R C"
flags.

Cay