Received: by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (940816.SGI.8.6.9/911001.SGI)
	for tiff-list id LAA26339; Fri, 21 Oct 1994 11:44:00 -0700
Return-Path: <owner-tiff>
Received: from sgi.sgi.com by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com via ESMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/911001.SGI)
	for <tiff-relay@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com> id LAA26332; Fri, 21 Oct 1994 11:43:54 -0700
Received: from research.att.com by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (940627.SGI.8.6.9/910110.SGI)
	for <tiff@sgi.com> id LAA15785; Fri, 21 Oct 1994 11:43:51 -0700
Message-Id: <199410211843.LAA15785@sgi.sgi.com>
Received: by research.att.com; Fri Oct 21 14:36 EDT 1994
Received: from papyrus.UUCP by allegra.tempo.att.com; id AA18790; Fri, 21 Oct 94 14:36:58 EDT
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 94 14:36:56 EDT
From: jqa@allegra.att.com (Jim Arnold)
To: griffin@sur1a.hpsc.hisd.harris.com, mccoy@pixar.com, tiff@sgi.sgi.com
Subject: C++ tiff library
Sender: owner-tiff@sgi.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk

I strongly agree with Dan McCoy about the inadvisability
of replacing the C libtiff with C++.  Providing a separate
library might be ok (though I see very little motivation
for doing so).  Discarding the C version would be dreadful.

Jim Arnold
Bell Labs

