From:	Endlisnis <s257m AT unb DOT ca>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Namespaces
Date:	Sat, 12 Sep 1998 12:59:09 -0300
Organization:	NBTel Internet
Lines:	16
Message-ID:	<35FA9A4D.8D5ECD5F@unb.ca>
References:	<35F8414B DOT C559D94D AT unb DOT ca> <1998091123580600 DOT TAA20493 AT ladder03 DOT news DOT aol DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	fctnts07c20.nbnet.nb.ca
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Myknees wrote:
> Consequentially, there is not so much of a direct correspondence in C++ between
> source code and machine operations.  You can say *p++, and it might not have
> _anything_ to do with a pointer or incrementation.  (e.g. if p is an iterator
> that's not implemented as a pointer and the postfix ++ operator has been
> defined to do something else.)
	I don't see that as a bad thing.  I think it makes the language more
flexible.

-- 
     (\/) Endlisnis (\/)
          s257m AT unb DOT ca
          Endlisnis AT GeoCities DOT com
          Endlis AT nbnet DOT nb DOT ca


GeoCities.com
          Endlis AT nbnet DOT nb DOT ca

- Raw text -