ZZ>
  > JdeBP> PE>
  > JdeBP>   > E.g. how many people don't see 3 things in
  > JdeBP>   > the following program that make it non-ISO?
  > JdeBP>   >
  > JdeBP>   > // Print hello world!
  > JdeBP>   >
  > JdeBP>   > void main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
  > JdeBP>   > {
  > JdeBP>   >     printf("hello world\n");
  > JdeBP>   > }
  > JdeBP> PE>
  > JdeBP>
  > JdeBP>   Three ?  I see at least five. [...]
  >
  > PMFJI, but, there is no particular reason why this is C code as
  > opposed to C++ code [...] Perhaps I'm missing something in the thread.
ZZ>

  You are.  You are missing the fact that Paul is pretty hot on
  standards, and he wouldn't make the mistake of referring to an ISO C++
  standard when no such standard yet exists.  (-:

  Nevertheless, even assuming the C++ Working Paper as an ISO standard
  there are still three items that are non-conformant (wrong return type
  from `main', POSIX 1003 extension for environment pointer, and missing
   header).

  ( And if Paul is listening, he may care to note that the current C++
    WP is severely broken when it comes to `main', and the current
    wording differs in several significant respects from ISO C.  )

  There's a whole echo devoted to the C++ language, incidentally, where
  these sorts of discussions are better placed.  It's called CPLUSPLUS.

  > JdeBP <
___
 X MegaMail 2.10 #0:
--- Maximus/2 3.00