🚀 go-pugleaf

Scott Meyers wrote:
> 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?

This is flame bait, I assume.  MS may be big, but they don't have
veto power over the ISO.  The X Window System headers commonly (used to)
have a declaration with a variable named "new".  People dealt with it
in their various ways, and lately the header is different.

There are no plans to change the keyword published in any issues list
I have seen.  I would place the odds of a change there between about
zero and epsilon.

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

Scott Meyers <smeyers@netcom.com> wrote:
>....  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 ....
>(2) whether there are any plans to change the keyword as a result?

There are no such plans.  Does anyone think this conflict is reason to
change the C++ working paper?

Dag Bruck
Dynasim AB
-- 
Dynasim AB                            Phone:  +46 46 182500
Research Park Ideon                   Fax:    +46 46 129879
S-223 70 Lund                         E-mail: Dag@Dynasim.se
Sweden                                URL:    http://www.dynasim.se


[ 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
]

Scott Meyers wrote:
> 
> 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?

	MS doesn't control the committee -- they have one straw vote on the
joint ANSI/ISO committee, and one real one on the ANSI committee,
which as one vote on WG21, and one in international votes -- although
both ANSI and MS have influence extending beyond these formalities.

	There is no chance (IMHO) the keyword bool will be changed,
at least 2 leading compilers already implement bool, and it is far
too late in the standardisation process. Furthermore,
bool will probably be added to C9X as well, in some form (possibly
a macro or typedef).

-- 
John Max Skaller               voice: 61-2-566-2189
81 Glebe Point Rd              fax:   61-2-660-0850
GLEBE NSW 2037                 web: http://www.maxtal.com.au/~skaller/
AUSTRALIA                      email: skaller@maxtal.com.au
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy is
  in http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html. ]