Xref: utzoo comp.std.c:313 comp.lang.c:12144
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!k.cc.purdue.edu!l.cc.purdue.edu!cik
From: cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Third public review of X3J11 C (a scientist speaks up)
Summary: C++ is not sufficiently extensible.
Message-ID: <899@l.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 27 Aug 88 13:00:31 GMT
References: <64919@sun.uucp> <8358@smoke.ARPA> <4566@saturn.ucsc.edu> <1988Aug26.162706.22671@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department
Lines: 22

In article <1988Aug26.162706.22671@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <1290@garth.UUCP> smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) writes:
> >Sounds like somebody wants an extensible C.
> 
> It's been done, it works well, and it's readily available:  C++.

There are gross weaknesses in C++.  It does not allow the introduction of
new operators, for example.  It does not address the problem of multiword
hardware types, using machine dependencies where they can profitably be
used (see the discussion about short x short -> long), and other such
goodies.  I have used one type when C would assume another type; C++ would
complain.  

Fortunately, the newer C++ compilers do not reduce to C; that gave such
atrocious code that if there was another way it would be preferable.

C++ addresses a few of the weaknesses of C.  However, it ignores the worst
of the problems.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet, UUCP)