Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!udel!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Subject: Re: Smalltalk @ Operator in C++
Message-ID: <D5w87J.yu@research.att.com>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
References: <milodD5KGus.sp@netcom.com> <milodD5pFxn.FDK@netcom.com> <1995Mar23.061447.21690@mole-end.matawan.nj.us>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 12:33:19 GMT
Lines: 14
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:119084 comp.lang.smalltalk:22042

If I remember correctly, there was a discussion of introducing @ as
a C++ operator at some point in the standards work.  The context was
the desire to have a single symbol for exponentiation.

Several vendors of object-oriented databases spoke out strongly
against the idea.  Apparently there are a number of products out
there that take advantage of the fact that @ is not a valid C++
operator and use it to trigger various macro-like things of their
own.  Allowing @ as a C++ operator would break all that stuff.

After that, no one wanted @ badly enough to press the issue.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@research.att.com
