Lawrie Schonfelder writes:
> But Dick these include a number of the very functions that are wanted. Why
> can we not allow all of the intrinsic library. Cross compilers where the
> target arithmetics are different from the compiler system are an antique
> rarety. Why cripple (or at least injure) the language for such a minority
> problem.
The "easy" answer is because your position didn't get enough votes.
The subject of which intrinsics to allow was debated and voted on a
few meetings ago. Allowing them all was one of the options presented,
but it didn't win. I've not seen anything in this thread that wasn't
discussed during that vote. I was there, and I recall that it had
a pretty spirited discussion.
One can, of course, think the outcome of the vote was undesirable.
I don't think I'll step into that argument on either side.
But in the end, the only real answer, as with so many "why" questions,
is that it lost the vote. The question could be revisited, but such
revisting is generally a waste of time for all concerned unless there
is some new data or reason to believe that some people have changed
their minds. So far, I've seen neither. This doesn't mean that I
necessarily take either position on the question itself, just that
I haven't seen any new data or suggestion that people would likely
vote differently on a new round.
--
Richard Maine
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|