Difference between *.hxx and *.h header files?

[Joe Greer]

I knew that Borland had a C++ compiler long before Microsoft
did. I just wasn't sure that they used .cpp. And I'm not sure
that Borland had the weight to make it "the established
standard".

I've just taken a look at some old code that I wrote for the
Zortech C++ compiler---before Borland had C++, even. It uses
.cpp, so the usage of .cpp goes back to before Borland even.
And now I wonder where I saw .cxx---I know I've seen it, and I
think it was under MS-DOS, but if Zortech, Borland and Microsoft
all used .cpp, I don't know who's left. Glockenspiel, maybe?
(And we can "blame" Walter for .cpp.)

Of course, Microsoft bought Lattice C++ to kick start their own C++
compiler (thus MS' first C++ compiler was version 3.0 because it was based
on Lattice C++ 2.5x). Lattice was also using .cpp at the time.

joe

 

[James Kanze]

(e-mail address removed):

Of course, Microsoft bought Lattice C++ to kick start their
own C++ compiler (thus MS' first C++ compiler was version 3.0
because it was based on Lattice C++ 2.5x). Lattice was also
using .cpp at the time.

I didn't know that Lattice ever had a C++ compiler. (I thought
they were out of business before C++ came along.) I know that
Microsoft's first C compiler was from Lattice, which is why the
command to invoke it was lc (= Lattice C).

 

[Joe Greer]

I didn't know that Lattice ever had a C++ compiler. (I thought
they were out of business before C++ came along.) I know that
Microsoft's first C compiler was from Lattice, which is why the
command to invoke it was lc (= Lattice C).

You may be right. It was way long ago. Sigh.

joe

 

[James Kanze]

innews:[email protected]:

You may be right.

Or not. I'm sure that the first release of Microsoft C was in
fact Lattice, repackaged. And that when I went to look for a
C++ compiler for my MS-DOS machine (1989?), all I found was
Zortech---but that doesn't mean anything; I didn't find
Glockenspiel, for example, but I know now that it was around
then as well.

It was way long ago. Sigh.

Yep, but...

Out of curiosity, I did a web search for Lattice compilers,
and... the company still exists, and still makes C compilers!
Including one for the Z80 (with executables which run under
CP/M) and one for OS/2---all products which I would have sworn
didn't exist any more. Takes me back over twenty years.

No mention of C++, though.

 

[Joe Greer]

Or not. I'm sure that the first release of Microsoft C was in
fact Lattice, repackaged. And that when I went to look for a
C++ compiler for my MS-DOS machine (1989?), all I found was
Zortech---but that doesn't mean anything; I didn't find
Glockenspiel, for example, but I know now that it was around
then as well.


Yep, but...

Out of curiosity, I did a web search for Lattice compilers,
and... the company still exists, and still makes C compilers!
Including one for the Z80 (with executables which run under
CP/M) and one for OS/2---all products which I would have sworn
didn't exist any more. Takes me back over twenty years.

No mention of C++, though.

I did some research of my own and it appears that I was wrong (no big
surprise there. I still have reruns of old sitcoms running through my head
though). MS bought Lattice to jump start their C compiler, but their first
C++ compiler was VC 1.0. At the time the company I was working for was
firmly sticking with C until the battles with C++ and Objective C had a
clearer winner. Which is probably why I was a bit confused. Interesting
tromp through history though.

joe

 

[Joe Greer]

Or not. I'm sure that the first release of Microsoft C was in
fact Lattice, repackaged. And that when I went to look for a
C++ compiler for my MS-DOS machine (1989?), all I found was
Zortech---but that doesn't mean anything; I didn't find
Glockenspiel, for example, but I know now that it was around
then as well.


Yep, but...

Out of curiosity, I did a web search for Lattice compilers,
and... the company still exists, and still makes C compilers!
Including one for the Z80 (with executables which run under
CP/M) and one for OS/2---all products which I would have sworn
didn't exist any more. Takes me back over twenty years.

No mention of C++, though.

I did some research of my own and it appears that I was wrong (no big
surprise there. I still have reruns of old sitcoms running through my head
though). MS bought Lattice to jump start their C compiler, but their first
C++ compiler was VC 1.0. At the time the company I was working for was
firmly sticking with C until the battles with C++ and Objective C had a
clearer winner. Which is probably why I was a bit confused. Interesting
tromp through history though.

joe

 

[Jerry Coffin]

[ ... ]

I did some research of my own and it appears that I was wrong (no big
surprise there. I still have reruns of old sitcoms running through my head
though). MS bought Lattice to jump start their C compiler, but their first
C++ compiler was VC 1.0. At the time the company I was working for was
firmly sticking with C until the battles with C++ and Objective C had a
clearer winner. Which is probably why I was a bit confused. Interesting
tromp through history though.

Actually, MS' first C++ compiler was "Microsoft C/C++ 7.0". VC++ 1.0 was
the next release after that.

 

[James Kanze]

I did some research of my own and it appears that I was wrong
(no big surprise there. I still have reruns of old sitcoms
running through my head though).

An interesting article (about brand names that have disappeared)
in the NY Times magazine. One example they used: show people
who've been to Disneyland as a kid a trumped up image of
Disneyland with Mickey and Bugs Bunny, and most of them will
very clearly remember shaking hands with Bugs Bunny when they
were there. (Bugs Bunny, of course, is not a Disney character,
and there's never been a Bugs Bunny at Disneyland. Even if most
people who've been there remember seeing him if shown an image
with him in it.)

MS bought Lattice to jump start their C compiler, but their
first C++ compiler was VC 1.0.

MS didn't buy Lattice; they licensed the compiler. Lattice was
later bought by SAS, then its managers bought it back out again
(at least according to the corporate site).

At the time the company I was working for was firmly sticking
with C until the battles with C++ and Objective C had a
clearer winner.

I had C++ on my PC (the Zortech) before I was using it
professionally. I didn't hear of Objective C until after C++
had more or less established itself---at the time I bought the
Zortech compiler, the company I was at was evaluating languages
for the next big step: the competition was between Ada, C++ and
Eiffel.