Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 29 Sep 2000 19:04:54 +0100 (BST) | From | James Sutherland <> | Subject | Re: Linux kernel modules development in C++ |
| |
On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Marty Fouts wrote: > > My own opinion is that no, the nominal cost of standards documents has > > little to do with why programmers don't have complete and up to date > > definitions of the language. > > I can't change your opinion but I can tell you a fact: this is the > reason that *I* do not have a copy of the standard. If I could just > download it from a URL I would have done it long ago. Not that I can't > afford it, it's just too much of a pain in the butt.
That sounds likely to be a common case. Every real bookstore I've seen lately has had books on C, C++, Linux, Windows etc. programming - I have yet to see one with a since ANSI or IEEE document for sale!
OTOH, these standards documents aren't the most readable of text. Perhaps a human-friendly explanation of the standard would be more widely read?
> > Most of them, after all, are willing to pay > > 3-4 times that much for tutorial or text books on the language, often more > > than one. My opinion is that few C or C++ programmers actually possess > > complete and up to date definitions of the language, because many of them > > are unaware of or uninterested in the existence of such standards, because > > they believe that the dielect of the language they are using on their > > platform of choice is, for their purposes, the language, and so they believe > > they only need the vendor reference for the language. Also, standards are > > written in a peculiar style and dialect, and they require developing a > > certain kind of reading skill to be useful. > > I think you are wrong. No, that's too week. I *know* you are wrong. > If there was no cost in getting the standard every last one of us would > have it, the same way every last one of us has a copy of the kernel. > Consider this: if Linux costed $18, most of us wouldn't be here.
I wouldn't bet on that; I suspect most of us have bought a copy of Linux at some point, even if only via a magazine cover CD. We don't all have cable modems or OC-48s! (OK, I do as of this morning - even if the ISP is part-owned by MS...)
> Charging a toll on the standard is just plain evil. If ansi needs > money, let them get it some other way than by having a monopoly on this > public information.
I'd be inclined to agree with this - except it is difficult to find money other ways. Perhaps the companies concerned would be prepared to sponsor the process enough to cover all the costs?
James.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |