Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!herald.usask.ca!alberta!ubc-cs!uw-beaver!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!deccrl!decwrl!world!wmm
From: wmm@world.std.com (William M Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: type/member tags (was Re: asking an object for its type)
Message-ID: <1991Feb26.015835.15862@world.std.com>
Date: 26 Feb 91 01:58:35 GMT
References: <27C2D973.3C1B@tct.uucp> <DSOUZA.91Feb24173454@optima.cad.mcc.com> <70877@microsoft.UUCP>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Lines: 22

jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK) writes:
> I suggest that run-time type info can be specified as part of the language,
> can be done in a way that classes that don't want to use such a feature
> pay no price, and that run-time type info can be implemented in compilers
> at fairly low cost.

We agree.  In fact, I submitted an abstract for a paper for the April USENIX
C++ Conference describing exactly such a design; however, the program
committee decided that a design-only paper without implementation and user
experience did not meet their acceptance criteria.

> Therefore I suggest that compile vendors ought to agree to get together and
> decide how this should be done.

That was the reason for submitting the paper for publication in the first
place.  We're still interested in discussions with other compiler vendors to
see if a de facto standard for runtime type information can be established.
Perhaps we can get some of the interested parties together at the upcoming
X3J16 meeting in Nashua.

-- William M. Miller, Glockenspiel, Ltd.
   wmm@world.std.com