Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!pp!riunite!rfg
From: rfg@riunite.ACA.MCC.COM (Ron Guilmette)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: address of virtual function (revisited)
Message-ID: <205@riunite.ACA.MCC.COM>
Date: 13 May 89 17:41:48 GMT
References: <904@garya.Solbourne.COM> <6590121@hplsla.HP.COM>
Reply-To: rfg@riunite.UUCP (Ron Guilmette)
Organization: MCC  Austin, Texas
Lines: 60

In article <6590121@hplsla.HP.COM> jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock) writes:
>
>I agree Jerry.  And as I've complained to you before, I ought to be able
>to discuss these things freely [like what compiler I'm using]
>-- especially since people at AT&T are discussing these things freely.  
>But agreements between AT&T and HP prevent me from discussing these 
>things freely -- I've gotten my hands slapped before.  
>And then *you* complain about my inability
>to discuss these things freely.  I think that is unfair.  If AT&T
>people are free to discuss these things, then so should I be.  How
>about calling off your lawyers, so that we can discuss these things
>publicly?

Jim,

If you are really getting hassled for simply trying to get some facts
about cfront 2.0 out in the broad daylight, then that is obviously a
travesty.  I am reminded of the DoD's tendency to cloak even the most
innocent research in secrecy.  I believe that many uproars have been
caused by the DoD barring foreigners from various conferences, etc.
The uproar comes when people realize that a free flow of information
is one of the fundamental ingredients of progress.  I believe that
that applies to C++ as well.

>When 2.0 does comes out, how are people going to know what it can,
>or can't do?

Try it!  Then post your results here.  I'm sure that a lot of us
(me especially) would like to see some good test cases posted
here which show either things that do work or things that don't.

>Are some of these important issues going to be
>openly addressed?

I believe that that is what this newsgroup is for.

>Can we get a list of what new features are,
>or are not going to be in 2.0?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that it has been stated here
(several times) already that a description of 2.0 features will be
posted here at about the time of the release.

>Can we get a list of limitations
>on 2.0 ...

Does HP publish such lists for its own software products?  I think
not.  Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.  In general,
I expect hell to freeze over before total honesty with customers
becomes the norm in the software end of the business.

>Or are customers expected to buy a pig in a poke?

No. If you think that you are being mislead I suggest that you *not*
buy the product.
-- 
// Ron Guilmette  -  MCC  -  Experimental Systems Kit Project
// 3500 West Balcones Center Drive,  Austin, TX  78759  -  (512)338-3740
// ARPA: rfg@mcc.com
// UUCP: {rutgers,uunet,gatech,ames,pyramid}!cs.utexas.edu!pp!rfg