This is not about C++ but remedying an unintended slight.
I request the moderator's indulgence to allow a correction
in the same forum where the slipup occurred.

Francis Glassborow wrote in message ...
>In article <Tv1u2.2074$GN.865@news.rdc1.wa.home.com>, Larry Brasfield
><larrybr@seanet.com> writes
(Quoting Francis after a refutation of a "broken compiler" claim)
>>>Really?  Then I think there is something wrong with your compiler
>>>(MSVC++ 6.0)
>>
>>Not really.  That was just ill-considered noise.
>
>FWIW, the question mark after really indicates doubt as to the truth of
>the claim.  Conditional on it being true then there was something wrong
>with his compiler.

Please accept my apology for being unclear.  I took
your "Really?" exactly as a question and answered
it succinctly, too much so apparently.  My mention of
"ill-considered noise" was directed at the premise
of your "Then I think ..." statement.  I am sorry that I
let it appear that I was referring to your conclusion.

Having read comp.std.c++ for several years, I think
"ill-considered noise" is not among your outputs.

--Larry Brasfield
Above opinions may be mine alone.
X-Replace-Address
(Humans may reply at unundered larry_br@sea_net.com )




[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html              ]