Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!fwi.uva.nl!gene!caspers
From: caspers@fwi.uva.nl (B.M. Caspers (I))
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Borland language extension virtual function = [ ... ];
Message-ID: <1991Jun29.215713.17248@fwi.uva.nl>
Date: 29 Jun 91 21:57:13 GMT
References: <1991Jun27.210518.19589@Think.COM> <1991Jun28.022445.12167@mathcs.sjsu.edu> <1991Jun28.141744.2323@nthropy.uucp> <1991Jun28.172538.18568@europa.asd.contel.com>
Sender: news@fwi.uva.nl
Organization: FWI, University of Amsterdam
Lines: 18
Nntp-Posting-Host: gene.fwi.uva.nl

About the extension of C++: this is something that is also available with
Turbo Pascal for Windows:

procedure A; VIRTUAL;  = WM_XXXX + WM_YYYY;  // or something like this..

Borland *could* do this with Pascal, since they set their own "standard"
with TP. As soon as OWL for TPW came out, I have been wondering how they
would do this in C++.. They wouldn't change the language! Now I know: they
did, although tried to. Because this extension makes only sense in a
event-driven env'mt (correct me if I'm wrong), I don't think it would make
sense to include it in C++ itself. 

Another question: why did they do it in this way? There are several Windows
class libs around which do work wqith regular c++. 

-- John