🚀 go-pugleaf

smeyers@netcom.com (Scott Meyers) writes

 > I'm told that one of the members of a struct declared in the Microsoft OLE
 > headers is called "bool".  This would seem to present a problem for MS,
 > because they'll have to change their header file (thus annoying their
 > customers) if they want to produce a compiler that supports bool.  Does
 > anybody know (1) how the MS representatives on the ANSI/ISO committee let
 > this get through, and (2) whether there are any plans to change the keyword
 > as a result?

Like the representatives on many other companies, the MS representatives on
the C++ committee has been most cooperative and done great work to create
a viable standard. This involves balancing the needs of legacy code with
cleanliness of the language and its libraries. 

I don't think the MS representatives let `bool' ``get through.'' I think
they - most approproiately - decided that in this case use of a name as
a struct in a proproietary header was less important than getting the
best name for the language.

Alternative names for `bool' was discussed at the time and there is no
proposal to change it. IMO there be no any chance for such a change to
be accepted should someone propose it.

	- Bjarne
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy is
  summarized in http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html
]