Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!pop.stat.purdue.edu!hrubin From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Throwing stones at standard committee (was Cheating on the types) Summary: Constructive suggestions Message-ID: <8583@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> Date: 23 Mar 91 15:54:45 GMT References: <1991Mar20.195732.15376@appmag.com> <10146@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> <1991Mar22.202121.26272@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> Sender: news@mentor.cc.purdue.edu Lines: 53 In article <1991Mar22.202121.26272@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>, vsnyder@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Van Snyder) writes: > In article <8517@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes: > >... These > >are important considerations which the language designers do not seem > >to be able to understand. > It's easy to sit back and throw stones. Have you sent ONE concrete proposal > to X3J3? Have you attended a meeting? Have you corresponded with ANY member > on a topic relating to the language standard? Have you asked your employer / > sponsor to foot the bill for you to join the committee? > > If you don't like something about the way the language is designed, propose > an alternative, don't insult the people who worked hard to get what we have. Have you read my postings to comp.lang.misc and comp.arch? The "gurus" reading the postings of others, as well as mine, take the attitude We know what is best, and we know what is basic, and we will provide all the tools which are good for you. There is one situation in which I did send in detailed suggestions to a meeting--this one was on the IEEE standards for floating point hardware, which I find decidedly poor. I sent in a 5 page list, and I stated that I had seen the request for such in an announcement of an open meeting. So what did I receive in response? An invitation to attend that same meeting! These committes make it very expensive to participate. The cost of even obtaining copies of proposals are quite high for the expense budget of a university department. These committees are not really soliciting suggestions from users, and they seem to be resisting it. Also, most of my suggestions go in the opposite direction even from the idea of a language standard. The point is that what we need is great flexibility, not restriction. If these committees want to know what users might want, let them announce the situations where users can see them. Requests for suggestions should appear in the journals of the AAAS, American Mathematical Society, American Statistical Association, etc. Summaries of suggestions made should also appear in those journals. Does it make sense for me to attend a meeting of such a committee instead of teaching and doing research? I do attend meetings, but I probably would have not much interest and little to contribute to most of it. The people with complaints and suggestions can make them quite plainly without spending lots of time at meetings. The real problem is that these standards committees feel that restrictive standards are needed, instead of great flexibility, and that efficiency may involve doing what is not even thought of at the time. -- Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399 Phone: (317)494-6054 hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet) {purdue,pur-ee}!l.cc!hrubin(UUCP)