Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel-eecis!gatech!news.mathworks.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!uucp2.uu.net!allegra!akalice!ark
From: ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better!
Message-ID: <E4zCKE.CpC@research.att.com>
Organization: AT&T Research, Murray Hill NJ
References: <32ED02EE.22E2@netright.com> <32ED2448.685A@parcplace.com> <EACHUS.97Jan28144125@spectre.mitre.org>
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 14:36:14 GMT
Lines: 17
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.object:60840 comp.lang.c++:245788 comp.lang.ada:57192 comp.lang.smalltalk:51012 comp.lang.eiffel:18212

In article <EACHUS.97Jan28144125@spectre.mitre.org> eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) writes:

> Well, not quite true, AT&T has used
> C++ in phone switching systems and gotten roundly castigated for it
> when the inevitable failures occured.

Evidence, please?

As far as I know, all of AT&T's (now Lucent's) switching systems are coded
either in a slightly modified dialect of C or in a proprietary macro
assembly language.  We tried to get the switching systems people to use
C++ a number of years ago, but by the time C++ came along, the switching
software was much too big for it to make sense to rewrite it.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@research.att.com
				  http://www.research.att.com/info/ark
