Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 12/4/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rlgvax!guy
From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Numerical C and C++
Message-ID: <1973@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 31-May-84 19:19:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1973
Posted: Thu May 31 19:19:14 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Jun-84 11:24:08 EDT
References: <1311@mhuxt.UUCP> <5300001@hpdcdb.UUCP>, <1945@rlgvax.UUCP> <2811@alice.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 22

> >   According to some papers on the "C++" language done at Bell (which they're
> >   now just calling "C" and are calling what those of us in the real world
> >   know as "C" "old C"), you can:

> You seem to know a lot about what's going on here at Bell, Guy.
> Actually you are as ignorant as the other people who submit
> twenty news items a day.

Oh, piss off.  I'm only quoting what I read in the technical report which
was, in case you didn't know it, put out by AT&T Bell Laboratories.  If you
want to argue with the author of the CSTR (I won't try and spell it because
1) I don't have the papers at hand and 2) your little snide comment makes it
not worth the effort) go right ahead.  He states rather explicitly there
that C++ is also being called C and that what was C is being called "old C".
I only know what I read in the papers.  When the person who currently has
the papers returns from the business trip they're on, I'll be more than glad
to cite the exact statement, CSTR and page number and everything.

Sort of makes you look a little foolish, doesn't it?

	Guy Harris
	{seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy