Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: C needs BCD (ANSI People: Please Listen)
Message-ID: <4580@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 3-Nov-84 22:58:35 EST
Article-I.D.: utzoo.4580
Posted: Sat Nov  3 22:58:35 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 3-Nov-84 22:58:35 EST
References: <218@x.UUCP>, <162@inset.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 24

> Apparently: Stroustrup told the committee about the stuff he was doing,
> and they (surprise, surprise) totally ignored it !!!

I think this is being a bit unfair to the committee.  My understanding
is that they spent some effort coming to the conclusion that C++ is not
C, and that their mission in life is to standardize C, not C++.  This
is not a cop-out, it's a decision to limit objectives to keep the project
manageable and the result recognizeable.

C++ is an interesting language, it's had significant success on large
projects within AT&T, and with any luck it might even get released so
the rest of us can use it.  But it's not C.  The incompatibilities are
quite minor, but there are enough additions to make it a distinctively
different language.

This issue got discussed on the net a little while ago.  Shortly after
I made some comments along the same lines, I got a letter from Stroustrup
himself, which said in part:

> ... You are clearly right, ANSI standardization is not for new languages,
> 	and C++ is not ready for ANSI. ...
-- 
				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry