Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!ulysses!andante!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: ANSI C-compliant compiler (info req)
Message-ID: <9365@alice.UUCP>
Date: 17 May 89 01:48:17 GMT
References: <503@bnr-fos.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ
Lines: 17

In article <503@bnr-fos.UUCP>, klash@hobbes.UUCP (Karl Klashinsky) writes:

>     We are having a small war (read: debate) on whether we should
>     develop in C or in our own proprietary language.  Opponents of
>     C argue that C does not provide proper type-checking of function
>     arguments.  I'm arguing that ANSI C would give us this, and more
>     (portability is important), but I need to be able to wave an
>     ANSI C compiler in their face and say "See!  It really does
>     exist!"

How about C++?

It's portable, provides tighter type-checking than ANSI
compilers, and it's available now.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com