INCITS/ISO/IEC 14882:2003 vs INCITS/ISO/IEC 14882:1998

[Alexei Polkhanov]

Hello everybody!
I was looking for PDf version of ISO C++ standard on several websites and I found
few documents. one here: http://www.techstreet.com/cgi-bin/detail?product_id=49964
and it is named "INCITS-Adopted ISO/IEC Standard" and it tells me that this
version of standard was replaced by another review from year 2003.

I have my copy I purchased from same website many years ago and it says
ISO/IEC 14882-1998(E). Version from 2003 is different, in fact it is
786 pages instead of 732 pages for 1998 year version.

Does anyone now what is new in ISO C++ since 1998 ? Just curios if it is worth
to bye yr 2003 version to find out what new in those 54 pages ?

Just wondering if hash_map<> finally made it to standard ?

Cheers,
---
Alexei Polkhanov
Sr. Consultant/Software Systems Analyst
Tel: (604) 719-2515
E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
http://www.monteaureus.com/

 

[Alexander Terekhov]

Alexei Polkhanov wrote: ...

http://www.acceleratedcpp.com/authors/koenig/c++std/revisions.pdf

regards,
alexander.

 

[Walter Tross]

http://www.acceleratedcpp.com/authors/koenig/c++std/revisions.pdf

does anyone know of an equivalent document HIGHLIGHTING the changed
words, or anyhow easier to read?

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Hello everybody!
I was looking for PDf version of ISO C++ standard on several websites and I found
few documents. one here: http://www.techstreet.com/cgi-bin/detail?product_id=49964
and it is named "INCITS-Adopted ISO/IEC Standard" and it tells me that this
version of standard was replaced by another review from year 2003.

I have my copy I purchased from same website many years ago and it says
ISO/IEC 14882-1998(E). Version from 2003 is different, in fact it is
786 pages instead of 732 pages for 1998 year version.

Does anyone now what is new in ISO C++ since 1998 ? Just curios if it is worth
to bye yr 2003 version to find out what new in those 54 pages ?

Just wondering if hash_map<> finally made it to standard ?

2003 is a "bug fix". It has nothing new, only cleared certain implementation
issues. The upcoming major revision of the standard is still under
consideration and is cutely called "C++0x" in the community.






Ioannis Vranos

 

[JKop]

Just download it from somewhere else, I did. Paying for the C++
Standard is like paying to go for a walk. If I _did_ have the money,
then I'd make a _voluntary_ contribution, but charging for the C++
Standard is extortion.

 

[P.J. Plauger]

Just download it from somewhere else, I did. Paying for the C++
Standard is like paying to go for a walk.

You've obviously never played golf.

If I _did_ have the money,
then I'd make a _voluntary_ contribution, but charging for the C++
Standard is extortion.

From each according to his inclination? To each according to his
coercive power? I think you've delineated the Twenty-first Century
version of communism.

P.J. Plauger
Dinkumware, Ltd.
http://www.dinkumware.com

 

[Jeff Schwab]

Just download it from somewhere else, I did. Paying for the C++
Standard is like paying to go for a walk. If I _did_ have the money,
then I'd make a _voluntary_ contribution, but charging for the C++
Standard is extortion.

Do you steal other things you can't afford, too?

 

[JKop]

Jeff Schwab posted:

Do you steal other things you can't afford, too?

Yes.


Why? Are _you_ too proud to? I've had numerous versions of Visual
Studio, none of them paid for.


-JKop

 

[Walter Tross]

Jeff Schwab posted:



Yes.


Why? Are _you_ too proud to? I've had numerous versions of Visual
Studio, none of them paid for.


-JKop

May I answer for Jeff? It's not a matter of being proud, it's a matter
of being HONEST, which is something anybody can afford, if he can
afford reading this newsgroup, at least. Remember that there are lots
of alternatives which are FREE. If you don't understand why being
honest has advantages, try to focus your attention on all those times
you treat somebody in a way you wouln't like to be treated yourself.
Sorry for being OT

 

[Jeff Schwab]

May I answer for Jeff? It's not a matter of being proud, it's a matter
of being HONEST, which is something anybody can afford, if he can
afford reading this newsgroup, at least. Remember that there are lots
of alternatives which are FREE. If you don't understand why being
honest has advantages, try to focus your attention on all those times
you treat somebody in a way you wouln't like to be treated yourself.
Sorry for being OT

I agree. Having some sense of morality does not mean one is "too proud."

 

[Claudio Puviani]

Jeff Schwab posted:



Yes.


Why? Are _you_ too proud to? I've had numerous versions of Visual
Studio, none of them paid for.

And with this, you join the killfile. Some people believe in reforming thieves;
I believe in ostracizing them.

Claudio Puviani

 

[JKop]

Walter Tross posted:

If you don't understand why being honest has advantages, try to focus
your attention on all those times you treat somebody in a way you
wouln't like to be treated yourself. Sorry for being OT

In Irish, we have a saying:


Bó le Bata, Capall le Ceansacht


A cow with a stick, a horse with kindness


If you want a cow to do something for you, then use a stick. If you want a
horse to do something for you, then use kindness. Switch them around - now
the cow ignores you, meanwhile the horse has a "fight or flight" response,
which 99 times out of 100 will result in you getting an almighty kick.

Moral of the story: Think twice before you adopt the attitude of treating
others how you would like to be treated, it may differ from how _they_ would
like to be treated.

Long story short: if I can't afford food, I will not hesitate to rob it. Or
should I just take it like a man and starve with dignity?

The ridiculous prices of education, and even software development packages,
just adds to the poverty trap. If you're born into poverty and you want out,
maybe education will work for you. But what if you can't afford it?


The C++ Standard is not a luxury, it is a basic supplement. I will not pay
for it.