| To: | "Alexander Terekhov" <yyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Wojtek Lerch" <yyyyyy@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: XSH/XRAT conflict over cancellation points |
| From: | "Jason Zions" <yyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 21 May 2004 14:58:48 -0700 |
| Cc: | <yyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Thread-index: | AcQ/c/K/XhYrri5qTLOl6kMeWWdjdwACpvyg |
| Thread-topic: | XSH/XRAT conflict over cancellation points |
Can we kindly, PLEASE, not turn this mailing list into a debate about C++... AGAIN? We are about the business of standardizing a C language interface here. We're not doing C++. There has never been an IEEE or ISO project to standarize a C++ POSIX interface, and having such conversations here is, I assert, out of scope. Please? -----Original Message----- From: Alexander Terekhov [mailto:yyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 1:38 PM To: Wojtek Lerch Cc: yyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: XSH/XRAT conflict over cancellation points > And C++ does not require longjmp() ... http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3ED75B9D.808C8F4B%40web.de regards, alexander. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: XSH/XRAT conflict over cancellation points, Wojtek Lerch |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Standardized encoding names for iconv_open(), Jarkko Hietaniemi |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XSH/XRAT conflict over cancellation points, Wojtek Lerch |
| Next by Thread: | RE: XSH/XRAT conflict over cancellation points, Alexander Terekhov |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [All Lists] |