On Sep 15, 9:49 am, James Kanze <james.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 14, 5:35 pm, Pete Becker <p...@versatilecoding.com> wrote:
If the intended implication is that big companies somehow subvert the
C++ standards committee so that they can promote their own agendas,
that's simply false. For example, Microsoft really, really, really
wanted resumable exceptions back in the 90s, but didn't get them.
It's probably worth pointing out that within ANSI, each member
has a single vote. And that if your employer is a member, you
cannot be a member as an individual (which prevents large
companies from "stuffing" the ballot box). The result is that
you probably have more impact as an individual member than as an
employee of a large company. (But a lot depends on the
individual. Herb Sutter obviously has a lot of influence. But
because of the books he wrote, not because he works for
Microsoft.)
In the case of Herb Sutter.. his use to Microsoft is obvious. His
position on commitee adds him authenticity.. From his homepage..
http://www.gotw.ca/
He's clearly selling concurrency FUD ... though you have to read the
small print to see his sponsor.. Mr Sutter is quite the salesman i
believe..
Oh... We're all in the grip of the concurrent revolution
apparently...yes Mrs user.. You must upgrade to our next more power
hungry monolithic hardware ..heck you must even even stick 32 in the
box side by side to use your new printer...