Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!ames!eos!shelby!polya!shap
From: shap@polya.Stanford.EDU (Jonathan S. Shapiro)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Any interest in making C++ a real superset of ANSI C?
Message-ID: <9544@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 29 May 89 20:39:08 GMT
References: <973@aber-cs.UUCP>
Sender: Jonathan S. Shapiro <shap@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: shap@polya.Stanford.EDU (Jonathan S. Shapiro)
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 32

I was going to stay out of this, but it is time it ended.

1. The struct foo => foo stuff *is* being used.  Note that C++ *does*
correctly handle

	typedef struct foo { ... } foo;
and
	typedef struct foo foo;

so that this can be done portably.

People are relying on this behavior in both struct and class usage.

Inline and const are done better in C++ than in C.  I will refrain
from diatribes about committees. Similarly for various other syntactic
nits.

The tradtional variable declaration

	struct foo foo;

was simply gross.  It isn't hard to change these (and the struct names)
to
	struct foo_s foo;

which is both more readable and less error-prone in alteration.

C++ isn't C.  If it was, I would program in Eiffel (blch).

'Nuff said.

Jon Shapiro