Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!info-modula-2
From: jantypas@WOLF.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.mod2
Subject: Re: overloading
Message-ID: <8603052131.AA05808@sdchema.chem.ucsd.edu>
Date: Wed, 5-Mar-86 16:29:56 EST
Article-I.D.: sdchema.8603052131.AA05808
Posted: Wed Mar  5 16:29:56 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Mar-86 18:37:14 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 25

To: Donald_W._Gillies.osbunorth@Xerox.arpa
Subject: Re: Overloading
Date: Wed Mar  5 13:05:59 1986


True, I/O should NOT be part of the language itself.  Pascal taught us that.
However, the usual problem still persists in languages such as C and Modula:
As usual, Joe down the street likes his I/O standard better than yours and
because his is only $99.95 and yours isn't, we eventually get TWO standards
and neither is compatable with the other, not even taking into account things
such as file formats etc.  If someone could come up with a standard people
would stick with, then we could talk about portability. .. but the "standard
standards" are usually the lowest common denominator and hence anyone and
everyone is encouraged to extend the standard once again.  

While I don't disagree with your flame, I do feel that your term of "standard"
needs defining.

John Antypas 

UC San Diego
uucp: ...!sdcsvax!jantypas
arpa: jantypas@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu

1