Boost logo

Boost :

From: William Kempf (sirwillard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-08-22 10:07:34

--- In boost_at_[hidden], jsiek_at_l... wrote:
> Is there anything the ISO can do about refusal to conform?
> should not be allowed to use "C++" in the name of their compiler!

I don't think so. The ISO doesn't own the name C++. I'd think that
they could prevent them from claiming standards conformance, but MS
doesn't seem interested in making this claim any way. :(

> It
> is staggering to think of the amount of $$ lost in productivity
> day due to their noncompliance.

I very much agree. Up until now I've had no complaint with VC++ as
far as conformance goes. They led the pack on Windows for several
years, and only fell behind with VC++ 6 because of radical changes in
the standard, legal problems with Dinkumware, and the length of time
we've waited for an upgrade. It was frustrating, but
understandable. If VC++ 7 isn't standards conformant, however, MS
should lose market share here!

The good thing is that Intel already has a drop in compiler for
VisualStudio. Maybe they'll reach standards conformance with out MS
and programmers will switch in large enough numbers to drive the
point home to them. Better yet, the .NET initiative by MS will allow
any language vendor to integrate with VisualStudio so the door will
be open to even more vendors. In any event, with VC++ 7 it may be
time for programmers to leave MS in droves to convince them that they
must follow standards conformance!

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at