Re: Why your next language better be C++

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From	"Bo Persson" <bop@gmb.dk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: Why your next language better be C++
Date	Tue, 19 Jul 2011 17:19:37 +0200
Lines	22
Message-ID	<98llk4FmkoU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<j01me4$fq6$1@dont-email.me> <a6df52ad-ccd2-4e9a-93ea-56c30194ef86@ei5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
X-Trace	individual.net Eiitz8SBjMXXm879FYbYwwnntNYPDd9W2uXBQWt76LbMsT8D9S
Cancel-Lock	sha1:bO/E/EOhGus9eQd1YxaN/M1/H7k=
X-Priority	3
X-MSMail-Priority	Normal
X-Newsreader	Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646	Format=Flowed; Original
X-Antivirus	avast! (VPS 110719-0, 2011-07-19), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status	Clean
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.c++:7972

Show key headers only | View raw

Goran wrote:
> On Jul 18, 6:18 pm, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote:

>> "Do you want to use a language that isn't going to be
>> crippled by an evil proprietor?"
>
> There's lots of languages that don't have an evil proprietor. In
> fact, I am not sure that C# has an evil proprietor (AFAIK, CLR and
> C# spec are ECMA standards). I think, at best you can say that C#
> has an evil __implementor__.
>

The evil implementor also wrote the standards, which is a real 
limitation.

Any day they feel like it, they can provide an "improved standard" for 
ECMA to rubber stamp. Or implement it anyway.

Bo Persson

Thread

Why your next language better be C++ Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com> - 2011-07-18 11:18 -0500
  Re: Why your next language better be C++ "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-18 19:46 +0100
  Re: Why your next language better be C++ Goran <goran.pusic@gmail.com> - 2011-07-19 00:03 -0700
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ "Bo Persson" <bop@gmb.dk> - 2011-07-19 17:19 +0200
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-07-19 09:39 -0700
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2011-07-19 13:35 -0500
      Re: Why your next language better be C++ James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 05:31 -0700
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com> - 2011-07-19 13:59 -0500
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 01:42 +0100
  Re: Why your next language better be C++ BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-19 03:00 -0700
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 01:28 +0100
      Re: Why your next language better be C++ BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-21 00:37 -0700
        Re: Why your next language better be C++ Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-07-21 15:53 +0000
          Re: Why your next language better be C++ BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-21 12:31 -0700
            Re: Why your next language better be C++ Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 10:21 +0100
              Re: Why your next language better be C++ BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-22 10:43 -0700
  Re: Why your next language better be C++ James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-20 13:12 -0700
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-20 15:52 -0500
      Re: Why your next language better be C++ James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 05:39 -0700
        Re: Why your next language better be C++ "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 14:54 -0500
          Re: Why your next language better be C++ Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-07-21 13:47 -0700
          Re: Why your next language better be C++ Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 10:30 +0100
          Re: Why your next language better be C++ James Kanze <james.kanze@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 12:35 -0700
          Re: Why your next language better be C++ "Bo Persson" <bop@gmb.dk> - 2011-07-23 16:30 +0200
            Re: Why your next language better be C++ BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-23 12:04 -0700
            Re: Why your next language better be C++ Werner <werasm@gmail.com> - 2011-07-25 00:00 -0700
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com> - 2011-07-20 17:36 -0500
      Re: Why your next language better be C++ "Bo Persson" <bop@gmb.dk> - 2011-07-21 20:42 +0200
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ Ebenezer <woodbrian77@gmail.com> - 2011-07-20 22:36 -0700
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ Michael DOUBEZ <michael.doubez@free.fr> - 2011-07-21 04:52 -0700
    Re: Why your next language better be C++ "JBarleycorn" <jbnh2o@newsnet.org> - 2011-07-21 17:54 -0500

csiph-web