In article <56728@microsoft.UUCP> jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim Adcock) writes:
> Okay, in the odd chance there are any real-world C++ users [as opposed to
> compiler writers :-] out there willing to subject themselves to a standard-
> ization effort, does anyone have information on how real people get involved
> with the standardization effort?  Contact addresses?
>
OK.  Here's something that was put in front of us at the most recent
ISO POSIX meeting, where we received a report on progress towards a
standard for C++ by the ANSI X3J16 committee.  Note that, although ANSI
is a U.S. body, participation is open to anybody, anywhere.


   Call For Participation

   C++ Standards Process

We invite individual members of the international community to
participate in the C++ standardization process.  Users and vendors of
the C++ programming language have formed a committee to accelerate
acceptance of the language by beginning the standardization process.
The proposed work will cover the C++ language, as well as the
associated libraries and environment features.

At the committee's March 1990 meeting, working groups were established
for the Core Language, chaired by Andrew Koenig, and for New Language
Features, chaired by Bjarne Stroustrup.  Bjarne Stroustrup's revised
paper on Exception Handling was distributed for consideration.  The
production of a standard suitable for the international community is
among the goals adopted by the committee.

Participation may involve reviewing documents, submitting proposals,
and attending meetings.  Membership is open to citizens of the world.
For futher information, contact Dmitry Lenkov at

Postal Address  HP California Language Lab
   19447 Pruneridge Avenue, MS:47LE
   Cupertino, CA 95104
   U.S.A.

Telephone:  +1 408 447-5279
Facsimile:  +1 408 447-4924
Electronic mail: dmitry%hpda@hplabs.hp.com


Dmitry is X3J16 chair, so I guess he's the first point of contact for
all enquiries.  If I'm wrong, and if any working group member wants to
post a correction, feel free.  I'll cancel this posting if I see any
such correction.

For those interested in turning up at the next X3J16 meeting (its
third), it's to be in the silicon valley area, California from 12-16
November.  (No doubt the precise venue is now fixed, but I don't have
that information.) Anybody can show up as an observer at any meeting;
if you want to get to vote, and to get mailings and such, you have to
pay a membership fee of (give or take a substantial margin) $600 per
year.  (Again, correct me if I'm wide of the mark, somebody).

Me?  I don't even know C++, and I'm not participating.  Hell, I've got too
much committee work to do to learn a new language!

Doing harm, just by existing...
--
Dominic Dunlop

In article <1990Aug22.092444.24786@tsa.co.uk> domo@tsa.co.uk
 (Dominic Dunlop) writes:

[in reference to the ANSI X3J13 C++ standardization committee]

>if you want to get to vote, and to get mailings and such, you have to
>pay a membership fee of (give or take a substantial margin) $600 per
>year.  (Again, correct me if I'm wide of the mark, somebody).

Membership costs $250 per year, for both voters ("principal members")
and observing members.  There are some constraints on the principals,
namely, one cannot miss more than 1 meeting out of any three consecutive
meetings, and principal members are expected to "take home" work assignments.
Oh yes, and there is a limit of one principal member per organization
represented, with one "alternate" allowed.  You *are* allowed to represent
yourself.  Observing members can miss as many sessions as they want to, and
have access to all the same information that the voting members have.
But they can't vote... also, observing members get the same mailings and
so on.

Hope this helps!
--
John T. Baldwin                      |  johnb%srchtec.uucp@mathcs.emory.edu
Search Technology, Inc.              |
                                     | "... I had an infinite loop,
My opinions; not my employers'.      |  but it was only for a little while..."

In article <177@srchtec.UUCP>, johnb@srchtec.UUCP (John Baldwin) writes:
> Oh yes, and there is a limit of one principal member per organization
> represented, with one "alternate" allowed.  You *are* allowed to represent
> yourself.

An organization may have any number of alternates, however only the principal
may vote -- unless the principal is absent, in which case only one of the
alternates may vote.

You may indeed represent yourself, but not if you are an employee of a company
with an official representative.  For example, Jonathan Shopiro is the
AT&T representative.  That means that Bjarne Stroustrup may not vote at the
ANSI meetings, because he is an employee of AT&T.  He cannot even represent
himself at the meetings.

Of course he can speak all he wants to, and sometimes people even listen! :-)

And because Bjarne and I are both alternates (which is how I know the number
is not restricted to one), if Jonathan is absent, we get to decide which of
us will vote that day.
--
    --Andrew Koenig
      ark@europa.att.com

In article <11247@alice.UUCP> ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) writes:
>You may indeed represent yourself, but not if you are an employee of a company
>with an official representative.

I'm sorry I didn't make that more clear in my original posting.  This is
indeed the case.  What I meant to show: if your employer isn't sending a
representative and you have a strong enough reason to fund your own direct
participation, you may do so.

Hmmm.  What would the committee (or its parent, X3) do, if, for instance,
Fred Flakikode of XYZ Corporation were to become a principal member
(representing himself), and then two months later, XYZ Corp. applied for
the priveledge of sending a company representative?  Would there be any
difference depending on if XYZ was a large organization or not?  (i.e.
Department "A" is responsible for trying to send a representative, while
Fred works for Department "W" on the opposite coast.)

Just plain old-fashioned curiosity at work here.
--
John T. Baldwin                      |  johnb%srchtec.uucp@mathcs.emory.edu
Search Technology, Inc.              |
                                     | "... I had an infinite loop,
My opinions; not my employers'.      |  but it was only for a little while..."

johnb@srchtec.UUCP (John Baldwin) writes:
> ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) writes:
>>You may indeed represent yourself, but not if you are an employee of a company
>>with an official representative.

>I'm sorry I didn't make that more clear in my original posting.  This is
>indeed the case.  What I meant to show: if your employer isn't sending a
>representative and you have a strong enough reason to fund your own direct
>participation, you may do so.

This may well occur, but, as a datapoint, the cases I have seen (in X3H3) of
"representing oneself" were not folks whose company would not fund their
participation, but folks working as indpendent consultants/contractors, who
were part of no incorporated entity, but had a burning interest in the work
of the committee.  By adding "representing oneself" to the rules, ANSI allowed
these (highly motivated, they paid out of their own pockets) people to add to
the committee's productivity.

Kent, the man from xanth.
<xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>

In article <56632@microsoft.UUCP> jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK) writes:
>...  I'd like to have comp.std.c++ be the forum
>for "public input" on the c++ standard.  This is the spirit in which
>I am writing to comp.std.c++

There is a way to get public input into the standard, but it is *not* to
post something here.  It is to write it down, on paper, and send it to
X3J16.  Yes, standards committees read proposals from Joe Random User.
Yes, they pay attention.  Yes, they even sometimes adopt them.  It helps
a whole lot if you have implemented and used your proposal; there is no
substitute for actual experience with language changes.  It also helps a
whole lot if it addresses some important need rather than being a cosmetic
change, given that X3J16's job is to standardize an *existing* language,
not invent a new one.  Regardless, it should be detailed and specific and
should nail down exactly what you want changed and what you want it changed
to:  do not expect someone on the committee to spend his time fleshing out
your proposal for you!  They spend enough time working on their own.

It is very likely that members of X3J16 read this newsgroup, but they will
probably consider it to be informal discussion, not a source of formal
proposals.  Translation, they can ignore anything they disagree with.

If you are seriously concerned, even about a single issue, it is not that
difficult or expensive to join a standards committee.  ANSI committees
are *required* to be open to all.  They tend to consist mostly of compiler
implementors, since it is very much in their interests to put substantial
money and manpower into participation, but anybody can join.  Best is to
actually attend meetings, but you can join as an "observer" and simply
get all the paperwork.  There will typically be a fee, perhaps $100/yr,
to cover reproduction and mailing costs.  If you want to actually do
justice to belonging, there will also be a *lot* of time involved, because
at regular intervals the postman delivers several pounds of paper for you
to read and comment on.  People who haven't tried it have no concept of
how tedious this is.
--
It is not possible to both understand  | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
and appreciate Intel CPUs. -D.Wolfskill|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry

In article <56632@microsoft.UUCP> jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK) writes:
>...  I'd like to have comp.std.c++ be the forum
>for "public input" on the c++ standard.  This is the spirit in which
>I am writing to comp.std.c++

There is a way to get public input into the standard, but it is *not* to
post something here.  It is to write it down, on paper, and send it to
X3J16.  Yes, standards committees read proposals from Joe Random User.
Yes, they pay attention.  Yes, they even sometimes adopt them.  It helps
a whole lot if you have implemented and used your proposal; there is no
substitute for actual experience with language changes.  It also helps a
whole lot if it addresses some important need rather than being a cosmetic
change, given that X3J16's job is to standardize an *existing* language,
not invent a new one.  Regardless, it should be detailed and specific and
should nail down exactly what you want changed and what you want it changed
to:  do not expect someone on the committee to spend his time fleshing out
your proposal for you!  They spend enough time working on their own.

It is very likely that members of X3J16 read this newsgroup, but they will
probably consider it to be informal discussion, not a source of formal
proposals.  Translation, they can ignore anything they disagree with.

If you are seriously concerned, even about a single issue, it is not that
difficult or expensive to join a standards committee.  ANSI committees
are *required* to be open to all.  They tend to consist mostly of compiler
implementors, since it is very much in their interests to put substantial
money and manpower into participation, but anybody can join.  Best is to
actually attend meetings, but you can join as an "observer" and simply
get all the paperwork.  There will typically be a fee, perhaps $100/yr,
to cover reproduction and mailing costs.  If you want to actually do
justice to belonging, there will also be a *lot* of time involved, because
at regular intervals the postman delivers several pounds of paper for you
to read and comment on.  People who haven't tried it have no concept of
how tedious this is.
--
It is not possible to both understand  | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
and appreciate Intel CPUs. -D.Wolfskill|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry

In article <1990Aug17.165749.3270@zoo.toronto.edu| henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
|In article <56632@microsoft.UUCP> jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK) writes:
|>...  I'd like to have comp.std.c++ be the forum
|>for "public input" on the c++ standard.  This is the spirit in which
|>I am writing to comp.std.c++
|
|There is a way to get public input into the standard, but it is *not* to
|post something here.  It is to write it down, on paper, and send it to
|X3J16.  Yes, standards committees read proposals from Joe Random User.
|Yes, they pay attention.  Yes, they even sometimes adopt them.
....
|It is very likely that members of X3J16 read this newsgroup, but they will
|probably consider it to be informal discussion, not a source of formal
|proposals.  Translation, they can ignore anything they disagree with.
|
|If you are seriously concerned, even about a single issue, it is not that
|difficult or expensive to join a standards committee.  ANSI committees
|are *required* to be open to all.  They tend to consist mostly of compiler
|implementors, since it is very much in their interests to put substantial
|money and manpower into participation, but anybody can join.  Best is to
|actually attend meetings, but you can join as an "observer" and simply
|get all the paperwork.  There will typically be a fee, perhaps $100/yr,
|to cover reproduction and mailing costs.  If you want to actually do
|justice to belonging, there will also be a *lot* of time involved, because
|at regular intervals the postman delivers several pounds of paper for you
|to read and comment on.  People who haven't tried it have no concept of
|how tedious this is.

Okay, in the odd chance there are any real-world C++ users [as opposed to
compiler writers :-] out there willing to subject themselves to a standard-
ization effort, does anyone have information on how real people get involved
with the standardization effort?  Contact addresses?  ACM or IEEE magazine? etc?

....the rest of us will just continue our howling into the void....