Third public review of X3J11 C (a scientist speaks up)

[Hank Dietz]

	I've been using C for most programs since 1978.  I've taught and am
currently teaching a C programming course at Purdue University.  However, C
isn't supposed to be all things to everyone:  it is a systems programming
language and has little real competition as such (Ada? Modula 2?).

	Making C a numerical applications language has never been a priority,
nor should it be.  For example, fixed-point arithmetic would never be used
by most of the originally-intended C user community; it would simply clutter
the language definition and impede the development of good quality compilers.
I personally feel that X3J11 has done an outstanding job of resisting the
"kitchen sink" syndrome, keeping the language reasonably clean and
implementable, while resolving more than a few ambiguous/omitted details.
Propose a new language if you're not happy with any existing one.

	As for the language standardization process, if you're not willing
to attend the meetings nor to correspond in a reasonably formal way, I don't
think you've got much of a reason to complain.  Now, I'm a bit unhappy in
that I wasn't invited to be on X3J11 and would like to have had more input,
but even so I have had no trouble in getting X3J11 folk to listen to me.  My
number one remaining beef with X3J11 is that they changed the function
declaration syntax in an incompatible way without simultaneously providing
public-domain software to automatically convert old C programs to the new
notation...  but this is a problem I personally intend to remedy.

	So, let's not flame on about X3J11.  It isn't perfect, but it is C
and it is a better definition than we had before.  Enough said.

							-hankd