[TUHS] Re: [TUHS]: C dialects (was: I can't drive 55: "GOTO considered harmful" 55th anniversary)

[Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com>]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 04:48:04PM -0400, Paul Winalski wrote:
> On 3/13/23, Clem Cole <clemc@ccc.com> wrote:
> >
> > Too many people try to "fix" programming languages, particularly academics
> > and folks working on a new PhD. Other folks (Gnu is the best example IMO)
> > want to change things so the compiler writers (and it seems like the Linux
> > kernel developers) can do something "better" or "more easily."  As someone
> > (I think Dan Cross) said, when that happens, it's no longer C. Without
> > Dennis here to say "whoa," - the committee is a tad open loop.   Today's
> > language is hardly the language I learned before the "White Book" existed
> > in the early/mid 1970s.  It's actually quite sad.   I'm not so sure we are
> > "better" off.
> 
> I'd rather see programming language standards committees restrict
> their activity to regularizing existing practice.  Let vendors and
> others innovate by adding non-standard extensions.  Then take those
> that are really useful and adopt them as part of the standard.  But
> the committee itself should not be doing design.  We all know what
> they say about "design by committee", and it's all too true.

I wish I had a magic wand and could upvote this more.  You are exactly
right, that is exactly what standards should do, maybe with a little
leeway to resolve conflicts between 2 good ideas, but no more than
that.

But ego gets involved and things go pear shaped.