From: 0xCDCDCDCD@gmx.at   
      
   On 04.07.2012 06:30, Ivan Godard wrote:   
   > On 7/3/2012 12:16 PM, Zeljko Vrba wrote:   
   >> On 2012-07-03, Le Chaud Lapin  wrote:   
   >   
   >    
   >   
   >> According to that criterion, C++/CX could possibly be viewed as a   
   >> separate language since MS docs say that extensions can be avoided   
   >> and that everything can be done with standard C++.  Whether it   
   >> really IS a new language, or just an acceptable extension to C++,   
   >> depends on whether the developer is unreasonably burdened by using   
   >> ONLY ISO C++.   
   >   
   > You miss the point: CC++/CX is standard-conforming and can be called   
   > "C++" if and only if *any* standard-conforming program from a   
   > different system will successfully compile and (other than where the   
   > standard explicitly asserts behavior is undefined) execute correctly   
   > on the MS platform.   
   >   
   > As I understand it (as a non-CX user) C++/CX etc. fails this   
   > qualification trivially when the program uses MS "keywords" as   
   > identifiers. The UK report cites other examples of failure to conform.   
   >   
      
   I thought the UK report were about C++/CLI and not about C++/CX?   
      
   Anyway, can we please stop this hair splitting? I feel this is ridiculous.   
      
   So any compiler extension that adds new keywords not reserved and not   
   beginning with two underscores (that's the rule I think?) shouldn't be   
   "allowed" to call the resulting language C++? (Btw. last time I read up   
   on this, I may remember it wrong though, the MS keywords were context   
   sensitive, so I'm not even sure that (all) identifiers that are new   
   keywords would break such a program.)   
      
   As it stands, the MS C++ compiler is not 100% standard compliant (I'm   
   too lazy to look up specifics) but rather like a high 9x% percentage IIRC.   
      
   So you guys please go and write a non-contrived standard C++ example   
   that severely breaks because of the CLI (or CX) extension.   
      
   cheers,   
   Martin   
      
      
   --   
   Good C++ code is better than good C code, but   
   bad C++ can be much, much worse than bad C code.   
      
         [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]   
         [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)