Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!microsoft!jimad
From: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: Co-ordinating the polymorphism in C++
Message-ID: <70903@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 26 Feb 91 18:26:27 GMT
References: <1991Feb16.114422.14266@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> <27BFE464.3FB9@tct.uucp> <1991Feb19.065741.9669@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> <27C30630.523F@tct.uucp> <1991Feb21.185106.20605@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Reply-To: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 10

In article <1991Feb21.185106.20605@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> craig@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Craig Hubley) writes:

|Not equivalent, just consistent where other languages with longer 
|experience have proven the way to go.  

If old languages *had* proven the right way to go, people wouldn't still
be deriving new languages today.  C++ already is saddled with restrictions
imposed by attempting to be compatible with one old language. 

Let's not add more!