home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.xnet.com!news-admin
- From: kd9fb@xnet.com (Peter Mikalajunas)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
- Subject: Re: Opinions on Visual C/C++
- Date: Wed, 06 Mar 1996 03:57:08 GMT
- Organization: XNet - A Full Service Internet Provider - (708) 983-6064
- Message-ID: <4hj26l$6oj@flood.xnet.com>
- References: <4hdkm7$2jk@huron.eel.ufl.edu> <Dnq94s.Cx3@emr1.emr.ca> <4hhfho$igo@news.interpath.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: monsoon.xnet.com
- X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
-
- softbase@mercury.interpath.net (Scott McMahan - Softbase Systems)
- wrote:
-
- >John Grant (jagrant@emr1.emr.ca) wrote:
-
- >: On the other hand, "VISUAL C++" is NOT A LANGUAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
- >But look at it the other way:
-
- >At what point do extensions to the language make it a new
- >language instead of a version of an existing language?
- >Borland and Microsoft and GNU and all of them have so
- >many extensions you have to set switches to get ANSI
- >C compatibility.
-
- As long as the switch is there at compile time. I have yet
- to work with a compiler that defaulted to ANSI. Every one
- requires a conscious effort on the part of the programmer.
-
- This make sense. The vendor is selling a product to work
- on a particular platform. Throwing in ANSI compatibility is just
- one more item to put on the glossy. If you are asking
- $30,000 for a compiler, your customer has every right
- to expect it to handle platform specific issues. Because
- it can do low level RMS databases on a VMS system
- doesn't make it a different language. It merely gives
- the tool added flexibility.
- kd9fb@xnet.com
- http:\\www.xnet.com\~kd9fb
-
-