Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!hplabs!hpda!hpcuhb!hpcllla!hpclisp!hpclscu!shankar
From: shankar@hpclscu.HP.COM (Shankar Unni)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Re: X3J11 response to comments (was: Block Closure)
Message-ID: <660008@hpclscu.HP.COM>
Date: 2 May 88 20:12:03 GMT
References: <7754@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: HP NSG/ISD Computer Language Lab
Lines: 22

>
>Perhaps they didn't care to pay $50 (or however much CBEMA was charging) 
>for the latest standard, without which they cannot make a formal complaint
>that has to be listened to (or at least so I read on the net).
>
>Moral: if X3J11/ANSI wanted broad participation in drafting the standard,
>they should have made the standard available in machine readable form,

I agree. It's rather unreasonable to have to shell out such a large sum in
order to be able to send in a couple of comments. On the other hand (playing
devil's advocate), maybe X3J11 didn't want to wade through 30,000 comments
claiming that "noalias must go; this is non-negotiable" :-). To put it
another way, put your money where your mouth is :-) :-)

>                                                                      say
>in this group.

Now that's considerably harder. Maybe if they had a copy for anonymous FTP,
that would be OK (that way, *you*'re paying for the phone cost of transferring
it), but as a posting, it's too huge. My paper copy of the standard proposal
is 3/4" of double-sided copy...

--shankar