A
Ansel
Isn't it a lame use of human time and effort to maintain completely separate
C and C++ standards? As in the words of Betty White about Facebook: "It
seems like an incredible waste of time". Why don't the two standards groups
get together and agree on a common specification for the ground which both
standards cover? There would still be two separate standards, but they'd
both be exactly the same for the common ground. The common ground document
could be referred to by both standards instead of being maintained by both
groups in individual efforts resulting in different verbage in separate
specifications for the same functionality. This should happen after both
groups agree to completely align the C subset functionality on the next
realease of standards (e.g., VLAs? No one using them? Drop 'em in the name
of cooperation going forward).
C and C++ standards? As in the words of Betty White about Facebook: "It
seems like an incredible waste of time". Why don't the two standards groups
get together and agree on a common specification for the ground which both
standards cover? There would still be two separate standards, but they'd
both be exactly the same for the common ground. The common ground document
could be referred to by both standards instead of being maintained by both
groups in individual efforts resulting in different verbage in separate
specifications for the same functionality. This should happen after both
groups agree to completely align the C subset functionality on the next
realease of standards (e.g., VLAs? No one using them? Drop 'em in the name
of cooperation going forward).