ambiguous ?

[Forrest Gehrke,2C-119,7239,ATTBL]

In article <14110 at lanl.gov>, jlg at lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
> From article <11388 at smoke.BRL.MIL>, by gwyn at smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn):
> > [...]
> 
> > One can learn to exploit them (or, in your case, perhaps, simply
> > to deal with them), but discussion about whether what is, should
> > be, are a waste of time.
> 
> Why?  Is C set in concrete?  What about C++ ???   How about (C++)++ ?
> Why are you so defensive about possible change - maybe even improvement?

o


Hey! Maybe it's time to talk about adding pointers again. (;-)

Forrest Gehrke clyde!feg