From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-105477-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 29677 invoked by alias); 19 Nov 2004 04:52:55 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 29609 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2004 04:52:48 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out4.apple.com) (17.254.13.23)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 Nov 2004 04:52:48 -0000
Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (a17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225])
	by mail-out4.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAJ4xNYD010012
	for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:59:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay2.apple.com (relay2.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com
 (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.14) with ESMTP id <T6d59dec48c118064e141c@mailgate1.apple.com>;
 Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:53:26 -0800
Received: from [17.219.197.191] ([17.219.197.191])
	by relay2.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAJ4qiG8026946;
	Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:52:45 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1B18C7B1-39E3-11D9-B2D5-000A95BCF344@apple.com>
References: <442C1616-387F-11D9-9815-0030654C2998@hamburg.de> <C949FF38-2681-48A5-94D9-0228551C5902@apple.com> <m2is82okds.fsf@greed.local> <3D92B030-39C3-11D9-8317-00039390FFE2@apple.com> <A5C91B18-39CB-11D9-8CE1-000D936E5072@opengroupware.org> <1B18C7B1-39E3-11D9-B2D5-000A95BCF344@apple.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <D9FA47E4-39E6-11D9-8317-00039390FFE2@apple.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: gcc mailing list <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>, Mike Stump <mrs@apple.com>,
        Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org>,
        GNUStep <discuss-gnustep@gnu.org>,
        Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>
From: Ziemowit Laski <zlaski@apple.com>
Subject: Re: Is ObjC++ still in time for 4.0?
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:42:00 -0000
To: Matt Austern <austern@apple.com>
X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00670.txt.bz2


On 18 Nov 2004, at 20.25, Matt Austern wrote:

> This discussion should probably happen offline.  It's in Apple's 
> interest for ObjC++ to get into mainline.  It's also in Apple's 
> interest to make sure that there aren't any changes that hurt compiler 
> performance.  It's silly for this discussion to be happening on an 
> international email list when most of the people participating in it 
> have offices on the same floor of the same building.

Yes, some of this "silliness" (although it is symptomatic of things 
more serious) really should be confined to Apple, although I don't 
think it is appropriate to take the whole discussion offline 
altogether.  Just as currently Geoff is blocking an approach that Mark 
and Zack OKed (at least in principle), one could certainly envision 
Mark, Zack or others objecting to whatever we finally manage to agree 
upon in Cupertino.

--Zem