Re: The reuse of keywords in the C++ standard

"Moschops" <moschops@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> I note with some dismay the proposal to create a new meaning for the C
and 
> C++ keyword 'auto', as described in the do***ent N1984 (part of the 
> proposals for C++0X or whatever it's called now). Efforts are being
taken to
>
> ensure it doesn't conflict with the previous meaning of the keyword, but
why
>
> not simply have a whole new keyword? These guys aren't stupid, so I
assume 
> there must be a good reason.

I might be thinking about this too simply, but I'd imagine you can't
use a brand new keyword without worrying about potential collisions
with existing code, one example of which would be existing user
defined types.

I've always felt that the standards body works hard to ensure that
revisions to the standard won't break any existing standards-compliant
code.  I might be off the mark on that, however.

-- 
Peter Jones [pjones at domain below]
pmade inc. - http://pmade.com

      [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm
for info about ]
      [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]