Re: C++ templates

• Previous message: Dom Lachowicz: "Re: C++ templates"
• In reply to: Dom Lachowicz: "Re: C++ templates"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 22:48, Dom Lachowicz wrote:
> You're 5 years too late :)

Oopsie. I did point out my 'lack of familiarity' at least. ;)

> In fact, we intentionally only use a subset of C++ for
> what are now probably moot portability concerns. 5
> years ago, support for the STL, templates, exceptions,
> et. al. sucked in pretty much every compiler.
...
> Today, the picture is a little different. Should we
> re-evaluate our situation? Sure. I'm all for that.

Well that sums it up. Time for somebody with better knowledge and
understanding than myself to say any more.

-- 
- Charlie
Charles Goodwin <charlie_at_xwt.org>
Online @ http://www.charlietech.com

• Next message: Hubert Figuiere: "Re: C++ templates"
• Previous message: Dom Lachowicz: "Re: C++ templates"
• In reply to: Dom Lachowicz: "Re: C++ templates"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 18:17:58 EST