Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!meissner
From: meissner@xyzzy.UUCP (Michael Meissner)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: volatile isn't necessary, but it's there
Message-ID: <765@xyzzy.UUCP>
Date: 9 Apr 88 16:24:08 GMT
References: <7794@alice.UUCP> <10068@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Reply-To: meissner@xyzzy.UUCP (Michael Meissner)
Organization: Data General (Languages @ Research Triangle Park, NC.)
Lines: 15

In article <10068@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> lvc@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Lawrence V. Cipriani) writes:
| Seriously, this is a minor botch but still a botch.  I'm going to
| write to complain about this (among other things) in particular
| and the "vendor bias" in general.
| 
| Future language standardizations should have more representation by
| users, and this should be required by ANSI.  We've been had one too
| many times.

Then where were you?  Seriously, yes the ANSI C committee is top heavy
with implementors, but very few users have ever come to the meetings.
We do have a few users (around 8 out of 45ish voting members).  In fact,
one of the "users" spent his own money to attend.
-- 
Michael Meissner, Data General.		Uucp: ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!meissner
					Arpa/Csnet:  meissner@dg-rtp.DG.COM