In article <KANZE.95May2191120@slsvhdt.lts.sel.alcatel.de>,
James Kanze US/ESC 60/3/141 #40763 <kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de> wrote:
>
>|> I post here because comp.std.c++ is OPEN.
>
>I suppose that the "highly technical and somewhat selective" group is
>the standards committee itself...

Not really.  They let any jerk in who either has the cash or who can
convince some low-level government official that National Pride(tm)
demands participation.

I suppose that I can deal with the fact that no IQ tests must be passed
before a person is allowed to be the national representative of some
dumb country that otherwise doesn't give a darn about C++.  But I
really _do_ wish that the committee could expunge one particular
representative for his continuous and distinctive lack of brevity,
and his concominant public displays of foot-in-mouth disease.
--

-- Ron Guilmette, Sunnyvale, CA ---------- RG Consulting -------------------
---- E-mail: rfg@segfault.us.com ----------- Purveyors of Compiler Test ----
---- finger: rfg@rahul.net ----------------- Suites and Bullet-Proof Shoes -

John Barton (jjb@watson.ibm.com) wrote:
|>   I urge the potential moderators of a moderated comp.std.c++ to
|> work instead on an FAQ, one that can evolve, over time and through
|> the contributions of the many thoughtful contributors to
|> comp.std.c++, into a Rationale matching the standard.  Such an effort
|> would produce a permenent contribution, especially if a broad
|> range of design issues were covered, and ultimately lead to a context
|> for revision of the standard some years in the future.  Such an
|> FAQ would, by its nature, omit off-topic and insulting submissions
|> to comp.std.c++, without depriving the readers of this newsgroup of
|> the timely comic relief of an occasional ranting paranoid.

Independently of the proposal to moderate, I think that a FAQ would be a
good idea.  (I still support moderation, however.  I've seen moderated
groups, and they work.)
--
James Kanze           (+33) 88 14 49 00          email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs Bourgeois, 67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils en informatique industrielle--
                             --Beratung in industrieller Datenverarbeitung

Fergus Henderson (fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU) wrote:
|> matt@dogbert.berkeley.edu (Matthew Austern) writes:

|> >       TENTATIVE MODERATION POLICY
|> >
|> >Here are a few examples of which sorts of posts I consider to be
|> >germane and to be non-germane, and why.  This is intended to be a
|> >representative list, not an exhaustive one.  [And it's subject to
|> >change.  The other moderators' opinions are as important as mine!]

|> My views on moderation policy are still fairly fluid.
|> I'd prefer to err on the side of accepting some inappropriate posts
|> rather than on the side of rejecting some appropriate ones.

I agree.  When in doubt, post it.  There are just so many postings,
here, however, where there is simply no doubt.

|> >"How do I read from the joystick port?" Not germane to comp.std.c++,
|> >or, for that matter, to comp.lang.c++.  Posts like that will be
|> >rejected.

|> Yes.  However, discussion about whether certain facilities (even
|> joystick port access, although that is pushing it) have been or should
|> be standardised, or why they were not standardised, would be germane
|> IMHO.  So "Why didn't ANSI/ISO standardize joystick port access?"
|> would be a legitimate (though fairly silly) question for comp.std.c++
|> in my book.

Right.  The joystick example may seem farfetched, but: "How do I read
from cin without an echo and without waiting for a newline?"  Now, I
know that this is implementation dependent, and doesn't belong here, or
for that matter, in comp.lang.c++.  But rephrase the question to ask why
the standard doesn't contain such a method, and it's very germane.

(Actually, this particular question is so frequent, it should really be
in a FAQ, along with function hiding and virtual functions in
constructors.)
--
James Kanze           (+33) 88 14 49 00          email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs Bourgeois, 67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils en informatique industrielle--
                             --Beratung in industrieller Datenverarbeitung

I now believe that moderation of this group would be unnecessary if two
things happened:

1. All Borland compiler questions were posted somewhere else.
2. Anything to do with C+@ or Jim Fleming was banned.

Those two things account for (my rough guess) 25% of all the lame
postings. If we could also eliminate the following topics I think the
volume in this group would be cut in half:

3. Bitching about why C++ doesn't do garbage collection.
4. Asking why "new" allocates a big chunk of memory.
5. Tedious discussions about language efficiency that have nothing to do
with C++.
6. Anything to do with Microsoft's Visual so-called C++, which apparently
has a separate ANSI/ISO standard.

--
Gregory Jorgensen
radix consulting inc
radixinc@aol.com, radix@efn.org

"I would consent to have a limb amputated to recover my spirits." -- Samuel Johnson

In article <9512505.15179@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) writes:

> >"How do I read from the joystick port?" Not germane to comp.std.c++,
> >or, for that matter, to comp.lang.c++.  Posts like that will be
> >rejected.
>
> Yes.  However, discussion about whether certain facilities (even
> joystick port access, although that is pushing it) have been or should
> be standardised, or why they were not standardised, would be germane
> IMHO.  So "Why didn't ANSI/ISO standardize joystick port access?"
> would be a legitimate (though fairly silly) question for comp.std.c++
> in my book.

I agree with that: I'm inclined to think that only the most
eggregiously off-topic posts should be rejected.  Anything that really
is related to C++ standardization or language design in a substantive
way is acceptable.

And even though this question would be silly, there actually are some
important issues lurking behind it: should the C++ standard have
anything to do with platform-specific issues, or should it only deal
with facilities that are available on every platform?  Should the
standard, for example, have wording like "If this feature is provided,
it must be provided in such-and-such a way"?

My own experience with moderated newsgroups, by the way, is that no
matter how much people discuss moderation policy beforehand, it's
almost never necessary to have very heavy-handed moderation.  I
strongly suspect that the vast majority of submissions will be
acceptable by any reasonable standard.

--
Matt Austern          matt@physics.berkeley.edu
http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt

From: afcjlloyd@aol.com (AFC JLloyd)
Date: 3 May 1995 01:38:19 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

jim.fleming@bytes.com once again rants:

>In article <MATT.95Apr30105943@dogbert.lbl.gov>, matt@dogbert.lbl.gov
>says...
>>For one reason or another, though, some of us have decided to use C++
>>for at least some of our work.  We need a standard version of C++
>>(portability is very difficult without standardization), and we need a
>>place to discuss the design and standardization of the language.
>>comp.std.c++ is a place to discuss the C++ standard, not a place to
>>discuss Eiffel, Smalltalk, Modula-3, or Ada 95.  All of those
>>languages are important, and they ought to be discussed---but not in
>>comp.std.c++, unless, for some reason, experience with those languages
>>is relevant to C++ standardization.
>>--
>>Matt Austern                                  matt@physics.berkeley.edu
>>http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt
>
>@@@@@@ [a zillion unnecessary @s ommitted]
>What about languages which look almost like C++ but feature
>garbage collection, classes as first class objects, unlimited
>operator invention, a mature (and standard) class library of
>over 350 classes, etc. etc. etc. ???
>@@@@@@ [a zillion unnecessary @s ommitted]

Mr Fleming,

No matter how similar you think C@+ is to C++, it is NOT C++.  You are
perfectly free to attempt to create a market for C@+.  You are also
perfectly free to create a newsgroup for it.  The comp.std.c++ newsgroup
is for discussing the standardization of C++, not for the standardization
of C@+.  It is too late in the process to make the changes you mention
above (garbage collection, classes as first class objects, etc.).  My
personal opinion, which seems to be relatively common, is that the C++
community will be best served by completing the process as soon as
reasonbly possible, so that there is a definitive, complete standard.  I
do not want any significant changes to the language, because they will
cause the process to drag on longer than necessary.

Clearly, you are oblivious to comments such as these, and I expect you
will continue to post to comp.std.c++ in a hopeless attempt to promote
your own agenda.  You are free to do so -- I support your right to free
speech.  However, I urge you to think carefully about the consequences of
your continuing this fight.  I claim the consequences will be these:

1) Virtually everyone who has any exposure to comp.std.c++ will think of
you as a raving lunatic.
2) You will become more and more bitter, and less and less rational, and
therefore less able to promote C@+.

If you want to promote C@+ as an alternative to C++, there are much more
effective avenues for you to take.  I suggest you spend some of your time
exploring these other avenues.

Sincerely,

Jim Lloyd
Independent Software Consultant
--
| Fidonet:  afcjlloyd@aol.com 1:133/411.412
| Internet: afcjlloyd@aol.com
| Gateway:  Galaxy Information System (GIS) Atlanta

jim.fleming@bytes.com once again rants:

>In article <MATT.95Apr30105943@dogbert.lbl.gov>, matt@dogbert.lbl.gov
>says...
>>For one reason or another, though, some of us have decided to use C++
>>for at least some of our work.  We need a standard version of C++
>>(portability is very difficult without standardization), and we need a
>>place to discuss the design and standardization of the language.
>>comp.std.c++ is a place to discuss the C++ standard, not a place to
>>discuss Eiffel, Smalltalk, Modula-3, or Ada 95.  All of those
>>languages are important, and they ought to be discussed---but not in
>>comp.std.c++, unless, for some reason, experience with those languages
>>is relevant to C++ standardization.
>>--
>>Matt Austern                                  matt@physics.berkeley.edu
>>http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt
>
>@@@@@@ [a zillion unnecessary @s ommitted]
>What about languages which look almost like C++ but feature
>garbage collection, classes as first class objects, unlimited
>operator invention, a mature (and standard) class library of
>over 350 classes, etc. etc. etc. ???
>@@@@@@ [a zillion unnecessary @s ommitted]

Mr Fleming,

No matter how similar you think C@+ is to C++, it is NOT C++.  You are
perfectly free to attempt to create a market for C@+.  You are also
perfectly free to create a newsgroup for it.  The comp.std.c++ newsgroup
is for discussing the standardization of C++, not for the standardization
of C@+.  It is too late in the process to make the changes you mention
above (garbage collection, classes as first class objects, etc.).  My
personal opinion, which seems to be relatively common, is that the C++
community will be best served by completing the process as soon as
reasonbly possible, so that there is a definitive, complete standard.  I
do not want any significant changes to the language, because they will
cause the process to drag on longer than necessary.

Clearly, you are oblivious to comments such as these, and I expect you
will continue to post to comp.std.c++ in a hopeless attempt to promote
your own agenda.  You are free to do so -- I support your right to free
speech.  However, I urge you to think carefully about the consequences of
your continuing this fight.  I claim the consequences will be these:

1) Virtually everyone who has any exposure to comp.std.c++ will think of
you as a raving lunatic.
2) You will become more and more bitter, and less and less rational, and
therefore less able to promote C@+.

If you want to promote C@+ as an alternative to C++, there are much more
effective avenues for you to take.  I suggest you spend some of your time
exploring these other avenues.

Sincerely,

Jim Lloyd
Independent Software Consultant

  I urge the potential moderators of a moderated comp.std.c++ to
work instead on an FAQ, one that can evolve, over time and through
the contributions of the many thoughtful contributors to
comp.std.c++, into a Rationale matching the standard.  Such an effort
would produce a permenent contribution, especially if a broad
range of design issues were covered, and ultimately lead to a context
for revision of the standard some years in the future.  Such an
FAQ would, by its nature, omit off-topic and insulting submissions
to comp.std.c++, without depriving the readers of this newsgroup of
the timely comic relief of an occasional ranting paranoid.

--
John.

John J. Barton        jjb@watson.ibm.com            (914)784-6645
 <http://www.research.ibm.com/xw-SoftwareTechnology>
H1-C13 IBM Watson Research Center P.O. Box 704 Hawthorne NY 10598

> @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
> What about languages which look almost like C++ but feature
> garbage collection, classes as first class objects, unlimited
> operator invention, a mature (and standard) class library of
> over 350 classes, etc. etc. etc. ???
> @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Hello boys and girls.  Welcome to the neighborhood.

Can you say "vaporware"? It's spelled v-a-p-o-r-w-a-r-e.  It means software that
doesn't really exist.  Do you know what that means?  Well, it means that it's all
in someone's imagination.

Here's our next word.

Can you say "paranoid"?  It's spelled p-a-r-a-n-o-i-d.  It means someone who is
mentally unbalanced, who thinks there are conspiracies to do them in.  I want you
to know boys and girls that some sick people think that they know more than anyone
else.  Their delusions of grandeur make them think that everyone is out to ruin
them when the majority of the community disagrees with them.

Here's our next word.

Can you say "success"?  It's spelled s-u-c-c-e-s-s.  It means being able to
complete a task or job how you wanted to.  In software, many people have had
success using C++.  Has anybody heard of success from people using vaporware?

matt@dogbert.berkeley.edu (Matthew Austern) writes:

>       TENTATIVE MODERATION POLICY
>
>Here are a few examples of which sorts of posts I consider to be
>germane and to be non-germane, and why.  This is intended to be a
>representative list, not an exhaustive one.  [And it's subject to
>change.  The other moderators' opinions are as important as mine!]

My views on moderation policy are still fairly fluid.
I'd prefer to err on the side of accepting some inappropriate posts
rather than on the side of rejecting some appropriate ones.

>"How do I read from the joystick port?" Not germane to comp.std.c++,
>or, for that matter, to comp.lang.c++.  Posts like that will be
>rejected.

Yes.  However, discussion about whether certain facilities (even
joystick port access, although that is pushing it) have been or should
be standardised, or why they were not standardised, would be germane
IMHO.  So "Why didn't ANSI/ISO standardize joystick port access?"
would be a legitimate (though fairly silly) question for comp.std.c++
in my book.

--
Fergus Henderson                       | I'll forgive even GNU emacs as
fjh@cs.mu.oz.au                        | long as gcc is available ;-)
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh            |             - Linus Torvalds

In article <3o2q2a$tt@ritz.cec.wustl.edu>,
John Andrew Fingerhut <sg3235@shelob.sbc.com> wrote:
>Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran <janda@netcom.com> wrote:
>:Matthew Austern <matt@physics.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>:>"The standard says X, but I think that's a design flaw.  I think the
>:>language should be changed or extended." Probably germane.
>:
>:Never germane.  There are always reasons for "X", and if you really
>:think you're so great at designing languages, go for it.  Maybe
>:someday your language will even get a usenet newsgroup.
>:
>If you just want information about the standards process, publish a
>newsletter.  It is completely relevant to suggest that the langauge
>should include some feature, without having someone tell you to design
>your own language.  Otherwise, ANSI/ISO could have just created a new
>book cover to wrap the ARM and had C++ standard on it.  I'm certainly
>glad that extensions were made.

You did not write "The standard says X, but I think the language
should also include Y".  You wrote "The standard says X, but I think
that's a design flaw.  I think the language should be changed or
extended".
--
"I laugh because I dare not cry."

[ Followup-To: news.groups ]

janda@netcom.com (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
> You did not write "The standard says X, but I think the language should
> also include Y".  You wrote "The standard says X, but I think that's a
> design flaw.  I think the language should be changed or extended".

I already opposed moderating comp.std.c++, and arguments like this make
me worry even further. Rather than arguing about exactly where the
boundaries should be, to no-one's satisfaction, let's not moderate it.

        Tom

In article <D7vCp0.BA7@ucc.su.OZ.AU> maxtal@Physics.usyd.edu.au (John
Max Skaller) writes:

|> In article <MATT.95Apr27170424@dogbert.berkeley.edu>,
|> Matthew Austern <matt@physics.berkeley.edu> wrote:

|> >"The standard says X, but I think that's a design flaw.  I think the
|> >language should be changed or extended." Probably germane.
|> >Long-running discussions about the relative merits of various types of
|> >languages, though, would probably be better off somewhere like
|> >comp.lang.misc.

|> >"C++ is terrible, and Bjarne Stroustrup is an idiot."  Not acceptable.
|> >Posts should be technically cogent and flame-free.  (Note that "C++ is
|> >great, and Bertrand Meyer is an idiot" is unacceptable for the same
|> >reason.)

|>  I do not see how to separate these two things. One may be
|> more extreme and less polite but may still have content.

Two cases: 1) that's all the poster has to say.  Not germane.  2) That
is a lead in to something that may be a legitimate comment concerning
the standard.  In this case, I imagine that the moderator would still
reject it, but would inform the poster that if the personal comments
were removed, it would be acceptable.

|> >"What is the envelope-and-letter idiom?"  Not germane.  That's a
|> >question of C++ programming technique and it belongs in comp.lang.c++
|> >instead of comp.std.c++.

|>  How are you so sure that discussion of the kinds of techniques
|> that are or are not available -- and how easy they are to code
|> and use -- is not related to Standardisation? I think it can be.

"What is the envelope-and-letter idiom?"  Not germane.  "C++ should
have X in the standard to better support the envelope-and-letter
idiom."  Definitely germane.  (Substitute "discriminated unions" for
"envelope-and-letter idiom" if you prefer:-).)

|> >"How do you sort an array?" Not germane to comp.std.c++.  Conceivably
|> >its germane to comp.lang.c++, but something like comp.programming
|> >would probably be better.  (Or else just a copy of Knuth...)

|>  You use STL. And knowing about that seems to be a Standards
|> issue to me -- STL "sort" is part of the Standard Library.
|> And knowing if novices know about it and how to use it may
|> well be important to standardisers.

I don't buy it.  It still remains, at the best, a comp.lang.c++
question.  Basically:

"How do you sort an array?"  see comp.programming, and Knuth.

"How do you sort an array in C++?"  see comp.lang.c++ (use STL
"sort").

"Is the "sort" routine in my runtime library standard?"  acceptable.

Given the "newness" of STL (and some of the other features), I would
encourage the moderators to be somewhat liberal in enforcing this
restriction until such topics start appearing in standard texbooks
(although the exact question: "How do you sort an array?" is probably
still not germane).

|> Its not clear to me that moderation will achieve anything useful,

Lower volume and higher signal to noise ratio.

I also read comp.compilers (a moderated group).  I'd like something
with the same quality for C++.

|> except maybe establish a clique of language lawyers. The price
|> of freedom is sometimes we have to put up with unwanted behaviour.


|> I've met Fergus and think he'd do a good job. But I'm not sure
|> I'd retain interest in a moderated group. I'm already a member
|> of a group which is highly technical and somewhat selective.

|> I post here because comp.std.c++ is OPEN.

I suppose that the "highly technical and somewhat selective" group is
the standards committee itself.  Don't worry.  I'm sure that this
group will still remain far more open:-), even with moderators.
--
James Kanze         Tel.: (+33) 88 14 49 00        email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs-Bourgeois, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils en informatique industrielle --
                              -- Beratung in industrieller Datenverarbeitung

In article <3nv5qn$hp8@News1.mcs.com> jim.fleming@bytes.com (Jim
Fleming) writes:

|> >                          LIST OF MODERATORS

|> >comp.std.c++ will be moderated by panel.  A submission will be sent
|> >randomly to one of the moderators, who will decide to post or reject
|> >it.  There will also be an alias you can use to discuss matters
|> >(either individual posts or general policy) with all of the
|> >moderators.  The panel of moderators will be:
|> >        Matt Austern    (matt@physics.berkeley.edu)
|> >        Steve Clamage   (clamage@eng.sun.com)
|> >        Fergus Henderson (fjh@cs.mu.oz.au).
|> >
|> @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

|> For the record...I volunteered to help moderate...I guess I have not
|> "posted enough to the C++ newsgroups" (see below)...

Another criteria is no doubt that they must be respected enough that
their simple presence doesn't make a lot of people vote against the
proposal.

I find the proposed panel of moderators excellent.
--
James Kanze         Tel.: (+33) 88 14 49 00        email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs-Bourgeois, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils en informatique industrielle --
                              -- Beratung in industrieller Datenverarbeitung

In article <KANZE.95May2191856@slsvhdt.lts.sel.alcatel.de>,
kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de says...
>
>In article <3nv5qn$hp8@News1.mcs.com> jim.fleming@bytes.com (Jim
>Fleming) writes:
>
>|> >                          LIST OF MODERATORS
>
>|> >comp.std.c++ will be moderated by panel.  A submission will be sent
>|> >randomly to one of the moderators, who will decide to post or reject
>|> >it.  There will also be an alias you can use to discuss matters
>|> >(either individual posts or general policy) with all of the
>|> >moderators.  The panel of moderators will be:
>|> >        Matt Austern    (matt@physics.berkeley.edu)
>|> >        Steve Clamage   (clamage@eng.sun.com)
>|> >        Fergus Henderson (fjh@cs.mu.oz.au).
>|> >
>|>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
>
>|> For the record...I volunteered to help moderate...I guess I have not
>|> "posted enough to the C++ newsgroups" (see below)...
>
>Another criteria is no doubt that they must be respected enough that
>their simple presence doesn't make a lot of people vote against the
>proposal.
>
>I find the proposed panel of moderators excellent.
>--
>James Kanze         Tel.: (+33) 88 14 49 00        email:
kanze@gabi-soft.fr
>GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs-Bourgeois, F-67000 Strasbourg,
France
>Conseils en informatique industrielle --
>                              -- Beratung in industrieller
Datenverarbeitung
>
>

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

For those that are new to the Internet and Usenet...the past few months
have been a good example of how censorship is used, even on the net, as
an "attempt" for a small group of people to control information flow.

The people above are like children trying to stick fingers in a dike...
 ...I wonder who is going to come along to releive them...??
  when they tire of "playing censor"...

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

--
Jim Fleming            /|\      Unir Corporation       Unir Technology, Inc.
%Techno Cat I        /  | \     One Naperville Plaza   184 Shuman Blvd. #100
Penn's Landing      /   |  \    Naperville, IL 60563   Naperville, IL 60563
East End, Tortola  |____|___\   1-708-505-5801         1-800-222-UNIR(8647)
British Virgin Islands__|______ 1-708-305-3277 (FAX)   1-708-305-0600
                 \__/-------\__/       e-mail: jim.fleming@bytes.com
Smooth Sailing on Cruising C+@amarans  ftp: 199.3.34.12 <-----stargate----+
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\____to the end of the OuterNet_|

In article <MATT.95Apr27170424@dogbert.berkeley.edu>,
Matthew Austern <matt@physics.berkeley.edu> wrote:

>"The standard says X, but I think that's a design flaw.  I think the
>language should be changed or extended." Probably germane.
>Long-running discussions about the relative merits of various types of
>languages, though, would probably be better off somewhere like
>comp.lang.misc.
>
>"C++ is terrible, and Bjarne Stroustrup is an idiot."  Not acceptable.
>Posts should be technically cogent and flame-free.  (Note that "C++ is
>great, and Bertrand Meyer is an idiot" is unacceptable for the same
>reason.)

 I do not see how to separate these two things. One may be
more extreme and less polite but may still have content.

>"What is the envelope-and-letter idiom?"  Not germane.  That's a
>question of C++ programming technique and it belongs in comp.lang.c++
>instead of comp.std.c++.

 How are you so sure that discussion of the kinds of techniques
that are or are not available -- and how easy they are to code
and use -- is not related to Standardisation? I think it can be.

>"How do you sort an array?" Not germane to comp.std.c++.  Conceivably
>its germane to comp.lang.c++, but something like comp.programming
>would probably be better.  (Or else just a copy of Knuth...)

 You use STL. And knowing about that seems to be a Standards
issue to me -- STL "sort" is part of the Standard Library.
And knowing if novices know about it and how to use it may
well be important to standardisers.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Its not clear to me that moderation will achieve anything useful,
except maybe establish a clique of language lawyers. The price
of freedom is sometimes we have to put up with unwanted behaviour.

I've met Fergus and think he'd do a good job. But I'm not sure
I'd retain interest in a moderated group. I'm already a member
of a group which is highly technical and somewhat selective.

I post here because comp.std.c++ is OPEN.


--
        JOHN (MAX) SKALLER,         INTERNET:maxtal@suphys.physics.su.oz.au
 Maxtal Pty Ltd,
        81A Glebe Point Rd, GLEBE   Mem: SA IT/9/22,SC22/WG21
        NSW 2037, AUSTRALIA     Phone: 61-2-566-2189

In article <MATT.95Apr30105943@dogbert.lbl.gov>, matt@dogbert.lbl.gov
says...
>
>In article <3nv5qn$hp8@News1.mcs.com> jim.fleming@bytes.com (Jim Fleming)
writes:
>
>> For the record...I volunteered to help moderate...I guess I have not
>> "posted enough to the C++ newsgroups" (see below)...
>
>One of the minimum standards for someone to be a moderator is to be
>fairly well known to the comp.lang.c++ community.  I didn't bother to
>list another of the minimum standards, because I thought it was
>obvious: some degree of technical profficiency as a C++ programmer.  I
>think it's pretty obvious that Fleming isn't a C++ programmer at all.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I do not know where you get your information.
I use C++ every day...:)
I have programmed in C since 1976 after taking
a course at Bell Labs from Brian Kernighan.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>I don't see how someone who isn't a C++ programmer could be an
>effective moderator, and, frankly, I don't see why such a person would
>even want to try.
>
>> How about discussions on languages which look like C++ but fix most
>> of the problems?
>
>Not relevant to comp.std.c++.  I do not claim that C++ is the greatest
>language ever invented, nor do I claim that it is the right choice for
>all purposes.  In fact, anyone who has read all of my posts will have
>noticed that there are things I don't like about C++ and that there
>are other languages that I use and take seriously.
>
>For one reason or another, though, some of us have decided to use C++
>for at least some of our work.  We need a standard version of C++
>(portability is very difficult without standardization), and we need a
>place to discuss the design and standardization of the language.
>comp.std.c++ is a place to discuss the C++ standard, not a place to
>discuss Eiffel, Smalltalk, Modula-3, or Ada 95.  All of those
>languages are important, and they ought to be discussed---but not in
>comp.std.c++, unless, for some reason, experience with those languages
>is relevant to C++ standardization.
>--
>Matt Austern                                  matt@physics.berkeley.edu
>http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
What about languages which look almost like C++ but feature
garbage collection, classes as first class objects, unlimited
operator invention, a mature (and standard) class library of
over 350 classes, etc. etc. etc. ???
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

--
Jim Fleming            /|\      Unir Corporation       Unir Technology, Inc.
%Techno Cat I        /  | \     One Naperville Plaza   184 Shuman Blvd. #100
Penn's Landing      /   |  \    Naperville, IL 60563   Naperville, IL 60563
East End, Tortola  |____|___\   1-708-505-5801         1-800-222-UNIR(8647)
British Virgin Islands__|______ 1-708-305-3277 (FAX)   1-708-305-0600
                 \__/-------\__/       e-mail: jim.fleming@bytes.com
Smooth Sailing on Cruising C+@amarans  ftp: 199.3.34.12 <-----stargate----+
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\____to the end of the OuterNet_|

In article <MATT.95Apr27170424@dogbert.berkeley.edu>,
Matthew Austern <matt@physics.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>"The standard says X; I don't understand why.  Why was the language
>designed the way it was?"  Probably germane.  You should probably read
>The Design and Implementation of C++ before asking questions like
>that, though: it's a good book, and it explains a lot.

Change "should probably" to "should".

>"The standard says X, but I think that's a design flaw.  I think the
>language should be changed or extended." Probably germane.

Never germane.  There are always reasons for "X", and if you really
think you're so great at designing languages, go for it.  Maybe
someday your language will even get a usenet newsgroup.

>"C++ is terrible,

This is true.

>and Bjarne Stroustrup is an idiot."

This, however, is not.
--
"I laugh because I dare not cry."

In article <jandaD7vqzG.7u6@netcom.com>,
Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran <janda@netcom.com> wrote:
:In article <MATT.95Apr27170424@dogbert.berkeley.edu>,
:Matthew Austern <matt@physics.berkeley.edu> wrote:
:>"The standard says X, but I think that's a design flaw.  I think the
:>language should be changed or extended." Probably germane.
:
:Never germane.  There are always reasons for "X", and if you really
:think you're so great at designing languages, go for it.  Maybe
:someday your language will even get a usenet newsgroup.
:
If you just want information about the standards process, publish a
newsletter.  It is completely relevant to suggest that the langauge
should include some feature, without having someone tell you to design
your own language.  Otherwise, ANSI/ISO could have just created a new
book cover to wrap the ARM and had C++ standard on it.  I'm certainly
glad that extensions were made.

--
Stephen Gevers
sg3235@shelob.sbc.com

I promised to send this out more than a week ago.  Sorry...  I've been
doing a bit of thinking, but partly I've just been lazy.  Anyway, I've
changed a few things in response to comments that people made on the
first draft.  The main motivation for moderating comp.std.c++ is
unchanged: I think that it ought to be a low-volume newsgroup with a
high signal-to-noise ratio that can be read by everyone with a serious
interest in the C++ language.

This post consists of four main parts: an introduction, the (draft)
charter, a (proposed, and tentative) list of moderators, and a bit of
commentary on my idea of moderation policy.

Moderation policy is related to the charter, but it's not quite the
same: it's the standard moderators use when trying to apply the
charter to individual posts.  It's only fair to say a bit about the
moderation policy, but, inevitably, it'll end up changing with time
once the moderators have had a chance to see real posts and to talk
with each other.  Note also that this moderation policy is solely my
idea, not that of the other moderators.  I'm sure that it'll be
changed, at least to some extent, by the time of the actual RFD.

The list of moderators is important too.  The character of a moderated
group is largely shaped by the moderators, and, again, it's only fair
for people who will be voting on this proposal to have some idea of
what they'll be getting if they vote for it.  Accordingly, I've
decided that all of the moderators ought to be people who have posted
enough to comp.lang.c++ or comp.std.c++ so that you have had a chance
to form opinions about us.  You may or may not like the people on the
list, but at least you have enough information to make that decision.

Finally, since not everyone in comp.std.c++ and comp.lang.c++ is an
expert in Usenet politics, just a comment on the newsgroup voting
procedure itself.  The formal procedure is deliberately slow and
cumbersome, and, technically, the formal procedure hasn't yet started.
Once we've worked out a proposal that we think is reasonably good,
we'll send out a formal "Request for Discussion" (RFD), which will be
posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, and any groups that
would be affected in any way by this change.  Then there will be a
discussion period which will last at least two or three weeks (and
during which details of the proposal may change), and then, if the
result of the discussion is favorable, the proposal will go to a vote.
The vote also lasts about two weeks, and the proposal must pass by at
least a two thirds majority.  In other words: there are still plenty
of opportunities for your input.  If this change happens at all, it
won't happen until June at the earliest.

OK, enough preliminaries.  Now the RFD itself.

============================================================

          CHARTER

comp.std.c++ is for technical announcements and discussion of the
ANSI/ISO C++ standardization process and the C++ standard, and
discussion of the design and standardisation of the C++ language and
libraries. Other discussion that is directly related to the C++
standard (not related merely to C++ programming techniques) is also
welcome.  Posts should be cogent and free of personal attacks.

Questions about C++ _programming techniques_ should instead be posted to
comp.lang.c++. Questions that are specific to some particular platform
should be posted to a group devoted to that platform.


     LIST OF MODERATORS

comp.std.c++ will be moderated by panel.  A submission will be sent
randomly to one of the moderators, who will decide to post or reject
it.  There will also be an alias you can use to discuss matters
(either individual posts or general policy) with all of the
moderators.  The panel of moderators will be:
 Matt Austern (matt@physics.berkeley.edu)
 Steve Clamage (clamage@eng.sun.com)
 Fergus Henderson (fjh@cs.mu.oz.au).

[Additional volunteers are still welcome, but, as I said before, I do
think that if you want to be a moderator you ought to be someone who
has posted enough to the C++ newsgroups so that readers have heard of
you.]


       TENTATIVE MODERATION POLICY

Here are a few examples of which sorts of posts I consider to be
germane and to be non-germane, and why.  This is intended to be a
representative list, not an exhaustive one.  [And it's subject to
change.  The other moderators' opinions are as important as mine!]


Announcements about the ANSI/ISO C++ standardization process:
Always appropriate.

Announcements about other standards: It depends on how relevant to C++
they are.  I'd say that the C standard is relevant, as is the NCEG.
Maybe the OMG/CORBA stuff too.

"The standard seems to be incomplete or inconsistent; here's a case
that it doesn't seem to cover correctly."  Definitely germane.

"It seems to me that the standard says my compiler should do X, but
instead it's doing Y.  Who's right, me or the compiler?" Probably
germane.  If too many people post exactly the same thing, though, then
the moderators will only accept the first few articles.  There's no
need for repetition.

"I've got a question about some new post-ARM feature.  Has it been
included in the working papers yet, and, if so, what are the
semantics?"  Germane as of mid 1995.  Once the actual ANSI/ISO
standard comes out, though, and reference manuals are generally
available, questions like that will become less appropriate.

"The standard says X; I don't understand why.  Why was the language
designed the way it was?"  Probably germane.  You should probably read
The Design and Implementation of C++ before asking questions like
that, though: it's a good book, and it explains a lot.

"The standard says X, but I think that's a design flaw.  I think the
language should be changed or extended." Probably germane.
Long-running discussions about the relative merits of various types of
languages, though, would probably be better off somewhere like
comp.lang.misc.

"C++ is terrible, and Bjarne Stroustrup is an idiot."  Not acceptable.
Posts should be technically cogent and flame-free.  (Note that "C++ is
great, and Bertrand Meyer is an idiot" is unacceptable for the same
reason.)

"What is the envelope-and-letter idiom?"  Not germane.  That's a
question of C++ programming technique and it belongs in comp.lang.c++
instead of comp.std.c++.

"How do I implement the flyweight pattern in C++?"  Not germane.
That's not a standards question, but an object-oriented design
question or a C++ programming question.  It probably belongs in
comp.lang.c++ or comp.object.

"How do you sort an array?" Not germane to comp.std.c++.  Conceivably
its germane to comp.lang.c++, but something like comp.programming
would probably be better.  (Or else just a copy of Knuth...)

"How do I read from the joystick port?" Not germane to comp.std.c++,
or, for that matter, to comp.lang.c++.  Posts like that will be
rejected.
--
Matt Austern          matt@physics.berkeley.edu
http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt

In article <MATT.95Apr27170424@dogbert.berkeley.edu>,
matt@dogbert.berkeley.edu says...
>
>I promised to send this out more than a week ago.  Sorry...  I've been
>doing a bit of thinking, but partly I've just been lazy.  Anyway, I've
>changed a few things in response to comments that people made on the
>first draft.  The main motivation for moderating comp.std.c++ is
>unchanged: I think that it ought to be a low-volume newsgroup with a
>high signal-to-noise ratio that can be read by everyone with a serious
>interest in the C++ language.
>
>This post consists of four main parts: an introduction, the (draft)
>charter, a (proposed, and tentative) list of moderators, and a bit of
>commentary on my idea of moderation policy.
>
>Moderation policy is related to the charter, but it's not quite the
>same: it's the standard moderators use when trying to apply the
>charter to individual posts.  It's only fair to say a bit about the
>moderation policy, but, inevitably, it'll end up changing with time
>once the moderators have had a chance to see real posts and to talk
>with each other.  Note also that this moderation policy is solely my
>idea, not that of the other moderators.  I'm sure that it'll be
>changed, at least to some extent, by the time of the actual RFD.
>
>The list of moderators is important too.  The character of a moderated
>group is largely shaped by the moderators, and, again, it's only fair
>for people who will be voting on this proposal to have some idea of
>what they'll be getting if they vote for it.  Accordingly, I've
>decided that all of the moderators ought to be people who have posted
>enough to comp.lang.c++ or comp.std.c++ so that you have had a chance
>to form opinions about us.  You may or may not like the people on the
>list, but at least you have enough information to make that decision.
>
>Finally, since not everyone in comp.std.c++ and comp.lang.c++ is an
>expert in Usenet politics, just a comment on the newsgroup voting
>procedure itself.  The formal procedure is deliberately slow and
>cumbersome, and, technically, the formal procedure hasn't yet started.
>Once we've worked out a proposal that we think is reasonably good,
>we'll send out a formal "Request for Discussion" (RFD), which will be
>posted to news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, and any groups that
>would be affected in any way by this change.  Then there will be a
>discussion period which will last at least two or three weeks (and
>during which details of the proposal may change), and then, if the
>result of the discussion is favorable, the proposal will go to a vote.
>The vote also lasts about two weeks, and the proposal must pass by at
>least a two thirds majority.  In other words: there are still plenty
>of opportunities for your input.  If this change happens at all, it
>won't happen until June at the earliest.
>
>OK, enough preliminaries.  Now the RFD itself.
>
>============================================================
>
>                               CHARTER
>
>comp.std.c++ is for technical announcements and discussion of the
>ANSI/ISO C++ standardization process and the C++ standard, and
>discussion of the design and standardisation of the C++ language and
>libraries. Other discussion that is directly related to the C++
>standard (not related merely to C++ programming techniques) is also
>welcome.  Posts should be cogent and free of personal attacks.
>
>Questions about C++ _programming techniques_ should instead be posted to
>comp.lang.c++. Questions that are specific to some particular platform
>should be posted to a group devoted to that platform.
>
>
>                          LIST OF MODERATORS
>
>comp.std.c++ will be moderated by panel.  A submission will be sent
>randomly to one of the moderators, who will decide to post or reject
>it.  There will also be an alias you can use to discuss matters
>(either individual posts or general policy) with all of the
>moderators.  The panel of moderators will be:
>        Matt Austern    (matt@physics.berkeley.edu)
>        Steve Clamage   (clamage@eng.sun.com)
>        Fergus Henderson (fjh@cs.mu.oz.au).
>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

For the record...I volunteered to help moderate...I guess I have not
"posted enough to the C++ newsgroups" (see below)...

That's OK...I probably would have approved most of the postings...
it appears that what these people are searching for is "censorship"
not moderation...

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>[Additional volunteers are still welcome, but, as I said before, I do
>think that if you want to be a moderator you ought to be someone who
>has posted enough to the C++ newsgroups so that readers have heard of
>you.]
>
>
>                     TENTATIVE MODERATION POLICY
>
>Here are a few examples of which sorts of posts I consider to be
>germane and to be non-germane, and why.  This is intended to be a
>representative list, not an exhaustive one.  [And it's subject to
>change.  The other moderators' opinions are as important as mine!]
>
>
>Announcements about the ANSI/ISO C++ standardization process:
>Always appropriate.
>

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
How do you separate ANSI and ISO?

Are the same people members of each group?

Who are the members of each group?

How come these groups do not want anyone on the Internet to know
their identity?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>Announcements about other standards: It depends on how relevant to C++
>they are.  I'd say that the C standard is relevant, as is the NCEG.
>Maybe the OMG/CORBA stuff too.
>

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
How about discussions on languages which look like C++ but fix most
of the problems?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>"The standard seems to be incomplete or inconsistent; here's a case
>that it doesn't seem to cover correctly."  Definitely germane.
>

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
How can the standard be incomplete or inconsistent? They have spent
almost $100,000,000 developing the standard. How could anyone miss
something?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>"It seems to me that the standard says my compiler should do X, but
>instead it's doing Y.  Who's right, me or the compiler?" Probably
>germane.  If too many people post exactly the same thing, though, then
>the moderators will only accept the first few articles.  There's no
>need for repetition.
>
>"I've got a question about some new post-ARM feature.  Has it been
>included in the working papers yet, and, if so, what are the
>semantics?"  Germane as of mid 1995.  Once the actual ANSI/ISO
>standard comes out, though, and reference manuals are generally
>available, questions like that will become less appropriate.
>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Is there an ftp site for "the working papers"?
Is there an ftp site with the DRAFT standard?
Someone reported that the Standard is being "printed"...how does that
relate to the Internet distribution...? Paper does not feed through
routers ver well.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>"The standard says X; I don't understand why.  Why was the language
>designed the way it was?"  Probably germane.  You should probably read
>The Design and Implementation of C++ before asking questions like
>that, though: it's a good book, and it explains a lot.
>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Are you talking about the book called "The Design and Evolution of C++"?
 If so, are you making the assumption that the book is accurate?
 Are you aware the book is largely a one-sided piece of...
  ...marketing material?
  How long have you worked with C++?
  How about the other proposed moderators?

Is there another book called "The Design and Implementation of C++"?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>"The standard says X, but I think that's a design flaw.  I think the
>language should be changed or extended." Probably germane.
>Long-running discussions about the relative merits of various types of
>languages, though, would probably be better off somewhere like
>comp.lang.misc.
>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
How can the language be changed when it is a standard?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>"C++ is terrible, and Bjarne Stroustrup is an idiot."  Not acceptable.
>Posts should be technically cogent and flame-free.  (Note that "C++ is
>great, and Bertrand Meyer is an idiot" is unacceptable for the same
>reason.)
>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Bjarne Stroustrup is not an idiot and neither is Betrand Meyer.
That is about all they share in common... :)
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>"What is the envelope-and-letter idiom?"  Not germane.  That's a
>question of C++ programming technique and it belongs in comp.lang.c++
>instead of comp.std.c++.
>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
But idioms, tricks. and patterns can be used by C++ advocates to distract
people away from the awful design of the language. If you take these
away, people might bo forced to look at the bare language and the wording
of the standard. This might expose C++ and the designers would not like
that.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>"How do I implement the flyweight pattern in C++?"  Not germane.
>That's not a standards question, but an object-oriented design
>question or a C++ programming question.  It probably belongs in
>comp.lang.c++ or comp.object.
>
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
See above comment on idioms, tricks, and patterns.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

>"How do you sort an array?" Not germane to comp.std.c++.  Conceivably
>its germane to comp.lang.c++, but something like comp.programming
>would probably be better.  (Or else just a copy of Knuth...)
>
>"How do I read from the joystick port?" Not germane to comp.std.c++,
>or, for that matter, to comp.lang.c++.  Posts like that will be
>rejected.
>--
>Matt Austern                                  matt@physics.berkeley.edu
>http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
So, after all of the moderation work, basically you are going to
reject topics about joysticks...this seems like a lot of work
to protect people from joystick programmers.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
--
Jim Fleming            /|\      Unir Corporation       Unir Technology, Inc.
%Techno Cat I        /  | \     One Naperville Plaza   184 Shuman Blvd. #100
Penn's Landing      /   |  \    Naperville, IL 60563   Naperville, IL 60563
East End, Tortola  |____|___\   1-708-505-5801         1-800-222-UNIR(8647)
British Virgin Islands__|______ 1-708-305-3277 (FAX)   1-708-305-0600
                 \__/-------\__/       e-mail: jim.fleming@bytes.com
Smooth Sailing on Cruising C+@amarans  ftp: 199.3.34.12 <-----stargate----+
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\____to the end of the OuterNet_|

In article <3nv5qn$hp8@News1.mcs.com> jim.fleming@bytes.com (Jim Fleming) writes:

> For the record...I volunteered to help moderate...I guess I have not
> "posted enough to the C++ newsgroups" (see below)...

One of the minimum standards for someone to be a moderator is to be
fairly well known to the comp.lang.c++ community.  I didn't bother to
list another of the minimum standards, because I thought it was
obvious: some degree of technical profficiency as a C++ programmer.  I
think it's pretty obvious that Fleming isn't a C++ programmer at all.
I don't see how someone who isn't a C++ programmer could be an
effective moderator, and, frankly, I don't see why such a person would
even want to try.

> How about discussions on languages which look like C++ but fix most
> of the problems?

Not relevant to comp.std.c++.  I do not claim that C++ is the greatest
language ever invented, nor do I claim that it is the right choice for
all purposes.  In fact, anyone who has read all of my posts will have
noticed that there are things I don't like about C++ and that there
are other languages that I use and take seriously.

For one reason or another, though, some of us have decided to use C++
for at least some of our work.  We need a standard version of C++
(portability is very difficult without standardization), and we need a
place to discuss the design and standardization of the language.
comp.std.c++ is a place to discuss the C++ standard, not a place to
discuss Eiffel, Smalltalk, Modula-3, or Ada 95.  All of those
languages are important, and they ought to be discussed---but not in
comp.std.c++, unless, for some reason, experience with those languages
is relevant to C++ standardization.
--
Matt Austern          matt@physics.berkeley.edu
http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt