Re: C++ 0x size and complexity

Jeff Schwab <jeff@schwabcenter.com> writes:


  I was aware of this, but ignored it for the dramatic effect.


  Sorry. I have some settings in effect that should exclude
  bots, but sometimes also exclude human readers. So, when I
  post a URI, I add it to a special list, to temporarily
  allow access by nearly everyone:

SetEnvIf request_uri "standard_extensions_en$" alow_all=1

  I do not know why you still get ?403?, so I copy the text of
  the page here (The rest of this post is a fullquote of this page):

      http://www.purl.org/stefan_ram/pub/c++_standard_extensions_en
      (canonical URI).

      Stefan Ram

      Suggestion for C++ Standard Extension Library
      Specifications

            ?We need C++ libraries for doing "Webbish" things.?

            Bjarne Stroustrup

            http://public.research.att.com/~bs/omo_interview.html

      The C++ -standard library does not contain means to get
      the resource of a URI. One of the reasons for this might
      be that it is not possible to implement such a feature
      under every environment. However, the lack of
      standardization in this regard means that multiple
      solutions with incompatible interfaces will be developed
      for this purpose and C++ source code will have to take
      care for multiple interfaces if it is intended for
      different environments.

      Therefore, it is suggested to add standard extension
      library specifications to the C++ specification, which
      describe the interfaces of extension libraries. These
      libraries do not have to be part of a C++ implementation,
      but a C++ implementation might support a library extension
      and if its description claims to support the extension
      library, then this extension library has to comply with
      the specified interface. For example, a library to obtain
      resources via a network might be specified as "ISO C++
      Network Resource Extension Library Specification 1.0".
      A producer of C++-implementations then might claim that
      his product supports the "ISO C++ Network Resource
      Extension Library Specification 1.0". A C++-program
      might be written that requires this extension. Such a
      program will not be portable among all conforming hosted
      implementations, but among all implementations supporting
      this standard library extension.

      A set of extension library specifications might be
      specified as "Standard Library Extension Set, Level 1
      (2005)" to contain standard library extensions with
      features available under many environments, like a console
      library with the ability to detect key-press-events or a
      network library. A higher level extension set might
      contain a GUI library. Profiles for certain types of
      devices, like "Desktop Internet PC Standard Library
      Extension Set" are also possible. C++ already has two
      such "library levels" now, namely, the freestanding and
      the hosted implementations.

      Such extension libraries specifications should be
      documents separated from the C++ standard, so that the
      core language can be kept relatively small. In a very wide
      sense the goal of this suggestion is to create something
      like CPAN for C++, but while CPAN is a collection of
      implementations the suggested extension library
      specifications would only specify interfaces. Programmers
      then can bind their software to these interfaces while
      implementations might be available as part of C++
      -implementations or as separate units.

      J16/01-0028 = WG21 N1314

      After writing the above suggestion, I became aware that
      parts of it already are shared by the library WG of
      ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG21, the international standardization
      working group for the programming language C++. The
      document "J16/01-0028 = WG21 N1314" contains the following
      paragraph.

            ?Library extensions will be considered even if they
            cannot be implemented on every platform. For example:
            there are platforms that can support a hosted C++
            implementation, but that do not support threads or network
            communication. Libraries for networking and multithreading
            will be considered, even though they can't be implemented
            on such platform.?

            J16/01-0028 = WG21 N1314, as of 2001-05-17

            http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2001/n1314.htm

      Lack of Portable Libraries Reported

      The Journal COTS reports that the military migrates away
      from Ada towards Java. The portable libraries of Java are
      recognized as an edge over C++.

           ?Another advantage Java offers is a broad selection of
           standard, portable and scalable libraries. That's where
           it has an edge over C++. While C++ has some good
           libraries, they're not portable?one set of libraries is
           needed with Windows, a different set is needed for
           Solaris, and yet another for Linux.?

           Jeff Child

           http://www.cotsjournalonline.com/pdfs/2003/07/COTS07_softside.pdf