If C++0x comes out in 2010, it can just be called ... C++0x7DA.

Is that deliberate?

--
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html                      ]

On Dec 5, 7:02 am, Kaz Kylheku <kkylh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If C++0x comes out in 2010, it can just be called ... C++0x7DA.
>
> Is that deliberate?

It's nothing new.
The "joke" is old.


--
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html                      ]

On Sat,  5 Dec 2009 01:02:01 CST, Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku@gmail.com>
wrote:

>If C++0x comes out in 2010, it can just be called ... C++0x7DA.
>
>Is that deliberate?

The original plan was to deliver a new standard prior to 2010, so the
'X' stood for a decimal digit: C++08 or C++09 for example, as a way to
refer to the new standard economically and informally.

Since it became clear that the schedule was too ambitious, there have
been no end of jokes about hex digits. For example, if scheduled for
publication in 2011, it could be referred to informally as C++0B.

Even though the standard will not be delivered before 2010, we have
chosen to keep the informal designation C++0X, so as not to introduce
any additional confusion. (If we started talking about C++1X, would
mean the same thing as C++0x? Yes, but we'd have to keep explaining
the change in name.)

Steve Clamage

--
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html                      ]

On 7 Des, 20:00, Steve Clamage <stephen.clam...@sun.com> wrote:

> Even though the standard will not be delivered before 2010, we have
> chosen to keep the informal designation C++0X, so as not to introduce
> any additional confusion. (If we started talking about C++1X, would
> mean the same thing as C++0x? Yes, but we'd have to keep explaining
> the change in name.)

Are you aware of any WG21 document (minutes or similar) that documents
this decision?

--
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html                      ]

On Dec 7, 7:00 pm, Steve Clamage <stephen.clam...@sun.com> wrote:
> On Sat,  5 Dec 2009 01:02:01 CST, Kaz Kylheku
> <kkylh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >If C++0x comes out in 2010, it can just be called ... C++0x7DA.

> >Is that deliberate?

> The original plan was to deliver a new standard prior to 2010,
> so the 'X' stood for a decimal digit: C++08 or C++09 for
> example, as a way to refer to the new standard economically
> and informally.

> Since it became clear that the schedule was too ambitious,
> there have been no end of jokes about hex digits. For example,
> if scheduled for publication in 2011, it could be referred to
> informally as C++0B.

> Even though the standard will not be delivered before 2010, we
> have chosen to keep the informal designation C++0X, so as not
> to introduce any additional confusion. (If we started talking
> about C++1X, would mean the same thing as C++0x? Yes, but we'd
> have to keep explaining the change in name.)

And of course, x is the standard mathematical notation for an
unknown.  There's still the 0 to contend with, of course, but
hopefully, there will be a zero in the year the standard is
finally adopted---we should get it well before 2111 (the next
year with no 0 in it).

--
James Kanze

--
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html                      ]

On 12/08/09 09:03, Triple-DES wrote:
On 7 Des, 20:00, Steve Clamage <stephen.clam...@sun.com> wrote:

Even though the standard will not be delivered before 2010, we have
chosen to keep the informal designation C++0X, so as not to introduce
any additional confusion. (If we started talking about C++1X, would
mean the same thing as C++0x? Yes, but we'd have to keep explaining
the change in name.)

Are you aware of any WG21 document (minutes or similar) that documents
this decision?


Perhaps I overstated the case. In Committee discussions and email,
Bjarne Stroustrup recommended that we keep referring to C++0X to
reduce possible confusion. Nobody disagreed, as far as I know.

Even if the informal designation were to be the subject of a document
or vote (not likely, IMHO), no document or vote would be required to
say that we will continue to do what we have been doing, unless
someone proposed a change. Nobody did.

---
Steve Clamage

--
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@netlab.cs.rpi.edu]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html                      ]