rmaddox@isicns.com (Randy Maddox) wrote in message news:<8c8b368d.0210110533.7b7aac89@posting.google.com>...

> Yes, either a current member or funding a new member would work.  The
> key is getting support somewhere on the committee.  IMHO, it would
> likely be better to get that support from a current, and preferably
> recognized, member of the committee since they will probably have more
> experience working with the committee than fresh meat off the street
> would.  Also, I would have to believe that if no current committee
> member is sufficiently interested to sponsor the effort, then that is
> likely to be a negative omen.

For additions to the standard library, approaching a committee member
directly makes the most sense if you have an existing library which
has already been widely used.  But it is still a risky proposition.

If I understand you correctly, you are looking for help innovating a
new solution, and then implementing it to make sure it works as
expected. For that sort of experimentation Boost (www.boost.org) is
really the best bet. In effect, Boost acts as a filter for the
standards committee's Library Working Group, and establishes the
existing practice that makes a library idea worthy of consideration
for standardization. All the mechanisms to take a proposed library,
refine it, turn it into widely used existing practice, and move it on
to become a proposal to the standards committee are already in place.
It is no accident that of the 16 proposals for the Library TR
currently in front of the committee, 13 originated from Boost
libraries.

--Beman

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]

francis.glassborow@ntlworld.com (Francis Glassborow) wrote in message news:<grBsUnBVlcp9EwiY@robinton.demon.co.uk>...
> In article <8c8b368d.0210100657.44fcf544@posting.google.com>, Randy
> Maddox <rmaddox@isicns.com> writes
> > If we can find a committee
> >member to back our efforts we might actually get somewhere.
>
> You seem to have this view of the Committee being some static body. Just
> find someone interested enough and fund there attendance. Of course
> there may be an existing member interested enough to put this issue near
> the top of those they wish to campaign for, but equally well there might
> not be.
>
>
> --
> Francis Glassborow      ACCU
> 64 Southfield Rd
> Oxford OX4 1PA          +44(0)1865 246490
> All opinions are mine and do not represent those of any organisation
>

Yes, either a current member or funding a new member would work.  The
key is getting support somewhere on the committee.  IMHO, it would
likely be better to get that support from a current, and preferably
recognized, member of the committee since they will probably have more
experience working with the committee than fresh meat off the street
would.  Also, I would have to believe that if no current committee
member is sufficiently interested to sponsor the effort, then that is
likely to be a negative omen.

Please do note too that despite my support for consideration of wide
character support for exception what() arguments, there is no need to
conflate the two concerns.  If we can move ahead with wide-character
file name support, then we should not freight that effort with the
weight of an unrelated issue.  One step at a time is still progress.

Randy.

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]

eldiener@earthlink.net ("Edward Diener") wrote in message news:<ONjo9.13879$OB5.1397398@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...

> I still have no idea of the formal
> way in which a proposal is made to the C++ committee for changes to the C++
> language or C++ standard libraries,

Look at http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/ for
documents with the word "Proposal" or "Proposed" in the title.

In the pre-Santa Cruz mailing, "Proposal to Add Static Assertions to
the Core Language" and "A Proposal to add Regular Expressions to the
Standard Library" are good examples of smallish/core and
largish/library proposals, respectively.

If you aren't a committee member or national body member yourself, ask
someone who is to explain how to get a document number and who to
email the proposal document to.

As a practical matter, people who aren't on the committee or a
national body usually team up with someone who is to help them through
the process.  For Boost libraries, Boost developers on the committee
help other Boosters move their proposals through the process.

> and gathered from the previous
> discussion that only implementations of proposed changes, and not just
> ideas, will somehow be considered.

While there is no rule that says that is true, it usually is true as a
practical matter. The committee has no staff to evaluate ideas or
develop test implementations. Many "good" ideas overlook problems that
only turn up when an implementation is attempted. Unless a proposal is
clearly a "stroke of genius" (to quote Bjarne) by far the easiest way
to convince skeptics is to show existing practice.

--Beman

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]

bdawes@acm.org (Beman Dawes) wrote in message news:<70fa0367.0210091402.7a874440@posting.google.com>...
> eldiener@earthlink.net ("Edward Diener") wrote in message news:<ONjo9.13879$OB5.1397398@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>
> > I still have no idea of the formal
> > way in which a proposal is made to the C++ committee for changes to the C++
> > language or C++ standard libraries,
>
> Look at http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/ for
> documents with the word "Proposal" or "Proposed" in the title.
>
> In the pre-Santa Cruz mailing, "Proposal to Add Static Assertions to
> the Core Language" and "A Proposal to add Regular Expressions to the
> Standard Library" are good examples of smallish/core and
> largish/library proposals, respectively.
>
> If you aren't a committee member or national body member yourself, ask
> someone who is to explain how to get a document number and who to
> email the proposal document to.
>
> As a practical matter, people who aren't on the committee or a
> national body usually team up with someone who is to help them through
> the process.  For Boost libraries, Boost developers on the committee
> help other Boosters move their proposals through the process.

At last we seem to be getting somewhere!  I volunteer to help with
this effort, although I am on a project with a deadline and cannot
devote endless time, I am very willing to help with discussing,
writing and reviewing a proposal.  I'm sure there are others willing
to volunteer some time too, so let's sign up and get going.  :-)

Of course, before devoting any more effort we need to know if there is
anyone on the committe who is willing to sponsor/support this effort.
Any volunteers there?  If not, I guess this just dies, until the next
time it comes up.

>
> > and gathered from the previous
> > discussion that only implementations of proposed changes, and not just
> > ideas, will somehow be considered.

I am not in a position to help do an implementation, but I am able to
provide review of an implementation.  Perhaps work already done by Ron
Natalie may be suitable, if that work can be used.

>
> While there is no rule that says that is true, it usually is true as a
> practical matter. The committee has no staff to evaluate ideas or
> develop test implementations. Many "good" ideas overlook problems that
> only turn up when an implementation is attempted. Unless a proposal is
> clearly a "stroke of genius" (to quote Bjarne) by far the easiest way
> to convince skeptics is to show existing practice.
>
> --Beman
>

So we have gotten some good feedback on how to proceed, and there seem
to be enough folks interested in doing so.  If we can find a committee
member to back our efforts we might actually get somewhere.  I for one
am very interested to see how this plays out from here.

Randy.

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]

In article <8c8b368d.0210100657.44fcf544@posting.google.com>, Randy
Maddox <rmaddox@isicns.com> writes
> If we can find a committee
>member to back our efforts we might actually get somewhere.

You seem to have this view of the Committee being some static body. Just
find someone interested enough and fund there attendance. Of course
there may be an existing member interested enough to put this issue near
the top of those they wish to campaign for, but equally well there might
not be.


--
Francis Glassborow      ACCU
64 Southfield Rd
Oxford OX4 1PA          +44(0)1865 246490
All opinions are mine and do not represent those of any organisation

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]