Appreciation for ANSI C committee (was Re: Bug in new K&R?)

[Michael J. Young]

In article <176 at proxftl.UUCP> bill at proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) writes:
>Also, consider this: historically, the very best languages (for
>their specific purposes) were put together by one person or a
>small number of cooperating individuals; the very worst were put
>together by committee.

There is a big difference between designing a completely new language from
scratch and standardizing an existing language.  The former is best done by
a small number (perhaps one) of capable language designers.  The latter is
best done by a committee.  Language design is a creative act, and committees
are not very creative.  A large part of standardization is finding common
ground between all the different implementations of an existing language.
In that process it is important to have as many perspectives as possible;
hence, a committee.

Although some might argue that X3J11 has been designing a whole new language
("it ain't C"), I think they have shown remarkable restraint (with one
glaring exception, which was corrected quickly), and should be proud of
their work.


PS:
I once saw a cartoon in which a car salesman was showing a bus to a
prospective buyer.  The caption read, "It's a special model for committees...
it comes equipped with one gas pedal, four steering wheels and ten sets
of brakes."
-- 
Mike Young - Software Development Technologies, Inc., Sudbury MA 01776
UUCP     : {decvax,harvard,linus,mit-eddie}!necntc!necis!mrst!sdti!mjy
Internet : mjy%sdti.uucp at harvard.harvard.edu      Tel: +1 617 443 5779
"Bill & Opus in '88" -- Consider the alternatives!