In article <1994May11.214341.29676@novell.com>, mlavine@novell.com (Marc
Lavine) writes:
>  I suspect that part of the problem is with the comp.std prefix, which
>  seems ambiguous.  Does comp.std.c++ refer to standard C++ (as opposed
>  to non-standard C++(?)), or does it refer the C++ Standard?  I think
>  that comp.standards.c++ might be slightly clearer.  Anyone for some
>  newsgroup hierarchy reorganization?

In article <BWH.94May11204150@native.cis.ufl.edu>, bwh@native.cis.ufl.edu
(Brian Hook) writes:
>  comp.lang.c++.standards
>  or
>  comp.lang.c++.standardization

I agree. I read this newsgroup only for some weeks, and IMVHO
``standardization'' is a little bit better than ``standards''
(referring to the question: ``What is the subject of this group?'').

--
Thomas Nitzsche <nitzsche@iis.inf.tu-dresden.de>
Student at the Department of Computer Science of the TU Dresden, Germany.
GCS/O d- p c+++@ l++ u++(-) e++ m s++/- n++(--) h--- f+ g+(-) w+ t r++ y?

Is my new reader getting even flakier, or is this newsgroup fading
away?  Only four threads are coming up, and not all of them are
really related to discussions of the forthcoming C++ standard.  If
the newsgroup is being phased out, is there a mailing list to which
can request to be added for discussions of the standard?  Thanks.

--
/*----------------------------------------------------------------------*/
/* Bob Kline                                           CSI Technologies */
/* bkline@smtp.csof.com                        Corporate Software, Inc. */
/* voice: (703) 522-0820                            fax: (703) 522-5407 */
/*----------------------------------------------------------------------*/

In article 4162@nlm.nih.gov, bkline%occs.nlm.nih.gov (Bob Kline) writes:
> Is my new reader getting even flakier, or is this newsgroup fading
> away?  Only four threads are coming up, and not all of them are
> really related to discussions of the forthcoming C++ standard.  If
> the newsgroup is being phased out, is there a mailing list to which
> can request to be added for discussions of the standard?  Thanks.

No, the newsgroup's not dying . . . it just doesn't seem to have a lot
of traffic.  I think it COULD have more of traffic if the standardization
process were more public.  When the standard (or a proposed draft of it)
becomes more widely disseminated, traffic will undoubtedly pick up.

Three problems that I see:
  -- a lot of postings to this group are not related to C++ standardization.
  -- some standards-related postings wind up in comp.lang.c++.
  -- lots of cross-posting between the two groups.

It seems that if the first posting in a thread is cross-posted, then so are all
of the followups.

---
Marc Shepherd
Salomon Brothers Inc
mshepherd@mhfl.sbi.com  The opinions I express are no one's but mine!

bkline%occs.nlm.nih.gov (Bob Kline @ National Library of Medicine) writes

 > Is my new reader getting even flakier, or is this newsgroup fading
 > away?  Only four threads are coming up, and not all of them are
 > really related to discussions of the forthcoming C++ standard.  If
 > the newsgroup is being phased out, is there a mailing list to which
 > can request to be added for discussions of the standard?  Thanks.

The signal to noice ratio on tne C++ groups is poor and getting worse.
One reason is that reasonable people seem to tire faster than fanatics.
Another is that good C++ programmers tend to be busy building systems
and find it hard to follow the convoluted threads on comp.std.c++ and
comp.lang.c++.

shepherd@debussy.sbi.com (Marc Shepherd) writes:

>Three problems that I see:
>  -- a lot of postings to this group are not related to C++ standardization.
>  -- some standards-related postings wind up in comp.lang.c++.
>  -- lots of cross-posting between the two groups.

I suspect that part of the problem is with the comp.std prefix, which
seems ambiguous.  Does comp.std.c++ refer to standard C++ (as opposed
to non-standard C++(?)), or does it refer the C++ Standard?  I think
that comp.standards.c++ might be slightly clearer.  Anyone for some
newsgroup hierarchy reorganization?

 -Marc
--
Marc Lavine
mlavine@Novell.Com

I think that a lot of problems stem from the "c++" being the suffix for
this newsgroup.  Many newbies see anything that ends with "c++" as the
solution to problems, so they don't apparently see a difference between
"comp.lang.c++" and "comp.std.c++"

If I were going to vote for a newsgroup, a new one under the
"comp.lang.c++" hierarchy would seem to make more sense:

comp.lang.c++.standards
or
comp.lang.c++.standardization

etc.

Brian
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Brian Hook            | Specializing in real-time 3D graphics   |
| Box 90315             |-----------------------------------------|
| Gainesville, FL 32607 | Internet: bwh@cis.ufl.edu | Free Tibet! |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+