Re: Linkage revisited

Article View: comp.std.c++

Article #1578

#1578

From: Andrew Koenig
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 22:53

15 lines
905 bytes

In article <1995Aug3.110213.1412@ittpub> wil@ittpub.nl (Wil Evers) writes:

> > Such a requirement is uninteresting, because
> > a vendor can simply say `Our C++ implementation is not
> > compatible with any C compilers' and meet the requirement
> > that way.

> Why would such a statement be uninteresting? If I was looking for a decent  
> C++ compiler, I'd be more than interested.

But your interest would be the same whether the Standard
said anything about it or not.  That's the point.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@research.att.com

Technical Details

Message-ID: <DCrBKn.Gto@research.att.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!in2.uu.net!allegra!alice!ark

References: <DCn5qw.94G@research.att.com> <1995Aug3.110213.1412@ittpub>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!in2.uu.net!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Subject: Re: Linkage revisited
Message-ID: <DCrBKn.Gto@research.att.com>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
References: <DCn5qw.94G@research.att.com> <1995Aug3.110213.1412@ittpub>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 22:53:11 GMT

Reply to Parent Message