In defense of the X3J11 committee (was Re: In defense of scanf())

[Chris Torek]

In article <10466 at smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn at smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>I have to say that I resent the tone of [ND]'s criticism.  X3J11
>did an excellent job of standardizing the C programming language,

Despite the razzings I give it as often as possible :-) , I have to
agree.  (I think my position is essentially the same as Henry Spencer's
and Dennis Ritchie's, although we may all disagree as to the few things
we think should have been done differently.  Henry and I enjoy teasing
in public.  Dennis, of course, would never do that; as Founder of the C
Programming Language, he has an Image to maintain.  And in case you
have not guessed by now, I am at it again.  But this started out as a
serious posting; maybe I can steer it back again....)

>and you could have participated if you had chosen to do so.

This might not be true.

Consider all the requirements for participation.

First, you have to know about the standardisation effort.  Now, despite
the sounds of protest I hear in the background, it is manifestly
evident that a large and vociferous group of people had never heard of
X3J11 until the noalias fight broke out.  (Perhaps this has something
to do with their vociferosity.  Oops, digressing again.)  Anyway, it
happens that many who might have participated in some standard hear
about it only when it is all over.

Assuming you do know of it, what else does it take to participate?

To be a committee member, you must be independently wealthy, or else
you must find a sponsor.  If you work for a company that sells
compilers, you have a sponsor.  If you work for a public university
that uses the language, you might possibly have some way to cajole some
dollars to leak out of the bureaucracy in your general direction, but
you do *not* have a `sponsor'.  If you work for a large corporation
that uses the language, you might have a sponsor.  If you are a
consultant, you will have to spend your own money.  And it does take
money.  Standards committee meetings, even for American National
Standards, are held all over, not just the U.S.A. but the world!  Only
fair, perhaps; American standards have a way of forcing the rest of the
world along, and there is much cooperation between the national and
international standards organisations.  You can expect to travel
to California, Vermont, France, and so on.  Of course, you can
mix vacations with work.  But the meetings also take time, which is
to say money.  Some $ here, some $ there; without a sponsor, most
cannot afford it.

Well, if you cannot be on the committee, at least you can influence
the committee.  That is what public reviews are for.  What does it
take for these?

Submitting review comments is much easier.  All you have to do is buy a
copy of the latest draft---for a mere $75 or so---learn Standardese,
read it from end to end, study everything closely, read it over again
(better check it once more to be sure), figure out what you want to
say, write it down, type it up, put it in a letter and send it in.

In two months.

Never mind the fact that you will not get your draft copy for three
weeks.  Well no; better mind it after all.  You have one month to study
and think.  If your work schedule is still on time, the children are
healty, the IRS does not audit you, your house is not under termite
attacks, and all the myriad other distractions are held at bay, why,
you have plenty of time.

(Of course, if you are a student, $75 might be a big deal.  Not to
worry.  Reviews come up no more than once a year, and you only have
to go through three or four.  By then you may have graduated anyway.
Besides, what do students know about languages?)

Well.  Perhaps I have overstated things, but what effect does your
public review comment have?  Unless you found an editorial mistake,
the reply will most likely be something like this:

	The Committee has reviewed your suggestion and voted on
	it.  The result was 29 to 1 against.

Or:

	The description in paragraph 4, subsection 13, section 517,
	chapter 33, volume 95 of the draft Standard is perfectly clear
	to everyone on the Committee.  So there!

(Well, maybe not.  Actually, some people send some really stupid
suggestions; the reply editor is required to be polite even then.)

There is one thing you can do.  You can get `observer' status.  For
some fee (I know not how much: I read a friend's copies of everything),
you can get everything that is mailed to each committee member be
mailed to you as well.  But that is an amazing amount of material.
Keeping up with it all is *hard*.  Though you get drafts early, the
amount of additional paper to read is daunting.  You may still have
trouble getting comments in on time.

Of course, if you think a bit, you will see that the committee
members have to do all this work too, and more besides.  And then
maybe you will appreciate their effort more.

(Gosh, I love twist endings!)
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris at mimsy.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris