psrc@pegasus.ATT.COM (Paul S. R. Chisholm) (02/08/90)
< Krasny Oktyabr: the hunt is on, March 2, 1990 > In article <1377@crash.cts.com>, elund@pro-graphics.cts.com (Eric Lund) writes: > I've heard from "gamma" testers that Turbo C 3.0 will be released and will > have AT&T C++ 2.0 compatibility. The question is WHEN? I can't seem to get > an answer out of them. Anybody know any release dates? Anybody care? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH! (This isn't just Eric's fault, though he's one of the more blatant offenders.) Look, when products are under development, even when they're sent out to beta testers, there are two reasons the companies involved want to keep things quiet. First, the software is (by definition) not ready for prime time. There will probably be known bugs, or missing features. There's still enough for beta testers to try to do real work, and find additional problems that testers in a lab might miss. Would you be panicked if you heard that Foobar C++ beta version 1.99 had a bug in pure virtual destructors?* You shouldn't; there's no reason to believe the fault won't be fixed when the vendor ships the final product. Second, if two companies are competing, it's to each company's advantage not to know what the other is up to for as long as possible. That way, the competitor won't be able to react as quickly, and the window of opportunity stays open longer for the first company. (*As discussed in comp.lang.c++, pure virtual destructors don't work, and shouldn't. They're functions that subclasses will call, but by definition can't be called. As Ohio University's President Ping once said, "This must and cannot be." See comp.lang.c++ for details.) As a result, every beta test I've heard of has required the beta testers to sign a non-disclosure agreement. This is a legal document; someone who leaks information could find his or her butt dragged into court. Also, all the times I've been a beta tester, I've never been told the release date any earlier than anyone else. I was sometimes given deadlines to report problems by, but I never even knew which beta release was the final one. If you really want to know about the next release of Turbo C or the first release of Turbo C++, ask Borland. They probably won't tell you. That's their privilege, right? > Eric, elund@pro-graphics, ...crash!pro-graphics!elund, > pro-graphics!elund@nosc.mil, elund@pro-graphics.cts.com Paul S. R. Chisholm, AT&T Bell Laboratories att!pegasus!psrc, psrc@pegasus.att.com, AT&T Mail !psrchisholm I've beta-tested products, both from AT&T and other vendors; but I'm not speaking for the company, I'm just speaking my mind.
elund@pro-graphics.cts.com (Eric Lund) (02/11/90)
In-Reply-To: message from psrc@pegasus.ATT.COM
Blatant offender, eh? I didn't ask for a release date. If there was one, I
would know it. I was asking for an estimation, which, after your brilliant
rhetoric, was not there. Have no fear, someone already answered me. Thanks
anyway.
Eric
ProLine: elund@pro-graphics
UUCP: ...crash!pro-graphics!elund
ARPA/DDN: pro-graphics!elund@nosc.mil
Internet: elund@pro-graphics.cts.comnoren@dinl.uucp (Charles Noren) (02/14/90)
The news about Turbo C 3.0 has already hit several trade
papers. No release dates given yet in those papers.
--
Chuck Noren
NET: ncar!dinl!noren
US-MAIL: Martin Marietta I&CS, MS XL8058, P.O. Box 1260,
Denver, CO 80201-1260
Phone: (303) 971-7930