Marcin Dalecki: >> Don't accept the marketing explanation either. > > Agreed. Maybe the idea of a subset of C++ basically coming down what > would be a C with inheritance > was somehow over-hyped by too much marketing bragging as an excuse for > some defective C++ compiler > implementation at introduction? Thus you still have grief memories > about it?
I distinctly remember the Sophia Antipolis meeting (just after the standard was completed, pending ISO official approval) where the issue was brought up vividly with "numbers". At the time, the reasons (whether excuses or not) were unconvincing, today they still are unconvincing. One ends up trying to find other reasons or excuses to make the conclusion hold. Ahem. I guess this subthread is diluting the topic advertized by the Subject: of this message. -- Gaby
