|
|
Paul Hsieh wrote:
> I am not a proposal generating beaurocrat. I am not an active
> participant in the standards process, and I am not a stakeholder. I
> have nevertheless proposed various API modifications in this very
> newsgroup over the years just on memory alone. They have never even
> been acknowledged by anyone who has influence with the standards
> committee.
>
> The (admittedly raw) proposals have typically been in the form of
>
> size_t memTotalAllocated (void);
> void * memExpand (...);
> size_t memSize(void *);
> enum MemType memClassify (void *);
> int memCheck (void *);
> int memWalk (int (* cb) (void * ctx, int state, void * loc), void *
> ctx);
Paul,
If you want to see real change from your proposals expand the
outline into a real document that can be debated. The process of
producing a document will require that details will have been
well thought out and the implication understood. Circulate the
document for honest debate and answer the critics.
It is this approach that starts real change in the standards process.
You are a stakeholder in this by the very fact that you are using
the language.
Spell out the details all the details. Standards are hard work
that involve a lot of time it is worth it. Prove that your approach
is better than the alternatives. Produce something that standards
organizations can actually debate so you will be heard.
Rant off
w..
|
|