Were GNU C extensions proposed for the standard?

[Shankar Unni]

> > Since the ANSI standardization of C++ is under way, there is not much point
> > in a subsequent standard for C that is not C++.
> 
> Why not? C is not C++. It's not certain that C++ is even the best way to
> add object-oriented features to C, particularly given the existence of
> a competing implementation, Objective-C, and languages like Eiffel that
> compile to C.

Well, since C++ gives you almost everything you ever wanted in C, why not
use it in a C-like fashion and simply take advantage of the nifty new
features (instead of dragging in the object-oriented paradigm)? No one
mandates that all C++ programmers *must* program in an O-O fashion.

C++ also makes wonderful sense as simply a "nicer C".
------
Shankar Unni.
Hewlett-Packard Company.