Were GNU C extensions proposed for the standard?

[Peter da Silva]

> > > 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++....

> Well, since C++ gives you almost everything you ever wanted in C, why not
[ use it without the object-oriented stuff ]

Because I might prefer the way Co2 or Objective C handles object oriented
stuff, and it's awfully silly to add two sets of O-O overhead to the
language. Besides, there's lots of stuff I'm missing from C that's not
in C++. Coroutines, for example...
-- 
 _--_|\  Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter at ficc.uu.net>.
/      \
\_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure!
      v  "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'