Newsgroups: alt.lang.design,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!pipex!uunet!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Subject: Re: Reference Counting (was Searching Method for Incremental Garbage Collection)
Message-ID: <D0CLt9.6K3@research.att.com>
Organization: Software Engineering Research Department
References: <19941203T221402Z.enag@naggum.no> <D0AnFE.MII@research.att.com> <LGM.94Dec5075553@polaris.ih.att.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 17:27:09 GMT
Lines: 22
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c:119333 comp.lang.c++:101724 comp.lang.lisp:15924

In article <LGM.94Dec5075553@polaris.ih.att.com> lgm@polaris.ih.att.com (Lawrence G. Mayka) writes:

> I am obliged to point out that, given AT&T's very close past and
> present relationship with C++ and strong private and public commitment
> to it, any refutation of Mr. Trickey's ancient memorandum and
> Mr. Koenig's comments above, including any contrary evidence, would
> very likely be stamped AT&T Proprietary--Not for Public Disclosure.
> AT&T employees cannot be considered unbiased, unconstrained
> participants in discussions of this kind.

No one is unbiased or unconstrained.

For the record, I will say that if a refutation of Trickey's paper
exists, I have not seen it.  Moreover, I have no reason to believe
one exists, if only because it is hard to refute experience.

I will also say that I work on C++ because I believe it is a
worthwhile endeavor, not because anyone is forcing me to do so.
And it is *far* from the only programming language I speak fluently.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@research.att.com
