home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: engnews1.Eng.Sun.COM!taumet!clamage
- From: clamage@Eng.sun.com (Steve Clamage)
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Subject: Re: Give operator. a chance
- Date: 25 Jan 1996 19:14:54 GMT
- Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc.
- Approved: clamage@eng.sun.com (comp.std.c++)
- Message-ID: <4e8jkb$p6o@engnews1.Eng.Sun.COM>
- References: <9602518.8676@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
- Reply-To: clamage@Eng.sun.com
- NNTP-Posting-Host: taumet.eng.sun.com
- Content-Type: text
- X-Nntp-Posting-Host: taumet.eng.sun.com
- Content-Length: 855
- X-Lines: 29
- Originator: clamage@taumet
-
- In article 8676@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU, fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) writes:
- >In article <3102AD11.1663@et.se>,
- >Dan Holmsand <dan@et.se> asks
-
- >dan> Is operator.() banned from the standards discussion?
-
- >and in article <DLost8.H9B@research.att.com>,
- >ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig) replies
-
- >ark> Yes.
-
- >but in article <4e0nc3$4dp@engnews1.Eng.Sun.COM>,
- >clamage@Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Clamage) writes:
-
- >clamage> No, it is not banned, [...]
-
- >So who's right, the editor or the chairman? ;-)
-
- Both. :-)
-
- De jure, not banned. De facto, nobody wants to talk about it anymore.
-
- If someone brought it up in the C++ Committee, he or she would probably
- be carried out bodily. (As Chair, I would publicly deplore the impropriety
- of physical assault, but only if I happened to notice that it occurred.)
- ---
- Steve Clamage, stephen.clamage@eng.sun.com
-
-
- [ 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://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]
-
-