c++ standard

[josh]

Where can I download a free copy of ISO C++ standard ?

 

[Eberhard Schefold]

Where can I download a free copy of ISO C++ standard ?

Legally nowhere, see
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/big-picture.html#faq-6.13

 

[josh]

Eberhard Schefold ha scritto:

Legally nowhere, see

That's incredible, it seems that also the C standard paper is not
free....right???

 

[Gavin Deane]

Eberhard Schefold ha scritto:


That's incredible, it seems that also the C standard paper is not
free....right???

Why is it incredible? Are you confusing free as in libertry with free
as in beer?

Do you expect the people who devote their skills, time and effort to
producing, distributing and selling bread to dispense with the bother
of charging you money for their services just because you happen to
need some bread today?

Gavin Deane

 

[josh]

Gavin Deane ha scritto:

Why is it incredible? Are you confusing free as in libertry with free
as in beer?

no I'm not confusing I know the difference but I only believed that
the standard papers could be free.

Do you expect the people who devote their skills, time and effort to
producing, distributing and selling bread to dispense with the bother
of charging you money for their services just because you happen to
need some bread today?

no I don't expect that but why not make a payable version and a
downloadable free version too ?
Java has its standard paper free to download...but also you can buy it

P.S.
.... I can write free software and commercial software
....I can witre free tech book and commercial tech book
.... anyone can choose what to do about its work...if to donate or not
... I've , simply, asked ..............

 

[Kai-Uwe Bux]

Why is it incredible? Are you confusing free as in libertry with free
as in beer?

Why do you think he might be confusing the two? The standard is not free in
either sense.

Do you expect the people who devote their skills, time and effort to
producing, distributing and selling bread to dispense with the bother
of charging you money for their services just because you happen to
need some bread today?

Are the people serving on the standards committee actually making profit of
it like the people who devote their skills, time and effort to producing,
distributing and selling bread?


Best

Kai-Uwe Bux

 

[Bill Medland]

Why do you think he might be confusing the two? The standard is not free
in either sense.



Are the people serving on the standards committee actually making profit
of it like the people who devote their skills, time and effort to
producing, distributing and selling bread?

How about covering costs? Surely they are entitled to do that! (and I don't
mean just the running costs; I mean the development costs too).

 

[Bill Medland]

Gavin Deane ha scritto:


no I'm not confusing I know the difference but I only believed that
the standard papers could be free.


no I don't expect that but why not make a payable version and a
downloadable free version too ?

Because then the payable version has to be more expensive than it would be
if everyone had to pay. And it's not like it's expensive! I really get
fed up with everyone deciding that the information world has to be free as
in beer!

 

[Kai-Uwe Bux]

How about covering costs? Surely they are entitled to do that! (and I
don't mean just the running costs; I mean the development costs too).

Covering costs is breaking even and not making profit. Also, I did not imply
that making profit from serving on the standards committee would be
inappropriate. I just wanted to point out that the analogy is broken if the
committee work does not yield profit.


Best

Kai-Uwe Bux

 

[Gavin Deane]

Covering costs is breaking even and not making profit. Also, I did not imply
that making profit from serving on the standards committee would be
inappropriate. I just wanted to point out that the analogy is broken if the
committee work does not yield profit.

Only if you assume that 100% of the price of a loaf of bread is profit.

Gavin Deane

 

[Kai-Uwe Bux]

Only if you assume that 100% of the price of a loaf of bread is profit.

Nope. The analogy is broken because the cases are not parallel if the
standards committee isn't in for profit whereas the bread people you listed
are. A better analogy would be a non-profit organization selling some
journal for a price just covering their costs. An amended analogy might
still suffice for you to make your point (one could discuss that), but that
does not mean your analogy was a sound one.


Best

Kai-Uwe Bux

 

[Kai-Uwe Bux]

Nope. The analogy is broken because the cases are not parallel if the
standards committee isn't in for profit whereas the bread people you
listed are. A better analogy would be a non-profit organization selling
some journal for a price just covering their costs. An amended analogy
might still suffice for you to make your point (one could discuss that),
but that does not mean your analogy was a sound one.

Now I thought a little bit more about whether an amended analogy would
suffice to make your point; and I think the answer is: no.

I take your rhetoric question as pointing out that it is an unreasonable
expectation that the standard would be offered free of charge simply
because there is a lot of work that goes into it. If people are motivated
by making profit, that would indeed mean they are less likely to give the
results of work away for free. However, if the motivation is of a different
kind, all bets are off. I find it quite common for scientists to put their
works on their web-pages, although these works are the results of much
work. Thus, it is a by no means unreasonable expectation to find people
who "devote their skills, time and effort" to writing top-notch research
papers puting the results of their hard work up on the net for free. These
people are, in some way, sponsored by their employers to do that. If the
members of the standards committee have employers who value their service
on the committee, it is by no means inconceivable that the standard could
be available for free. It would not have to be free, but thinking that it
could be free is not unreasonable.


Best

Kai-Uwe Bux

 

[Greg]

Eberhard Schefold ha scritto:


That's incredible, it seems that also the C standard paper is not
free....right???

The C Standard with the all of the latest additions and changes is
available here:

http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/n1124.pdf

Greg

 

[Gavin Deane]

Now I thought a little bit more about whether an amended analogy would
suffice to make your point; and I think the answer is: no.

I take your rhetoric question as pointing out that it is an unreasonable
expectation that the standard would be offered free of charge simply
because there is a lot of work that goes into it.

No. I felt it was an unreasonable expectation that the standard *must*
be offered for free because there is a lot of work that goes into it.
To suggest, as the OP did, that it is incredible (his word) that the
standard is not free struck me as unreasonable.

Of course it is up to the standards body whether to offer the standard
for free, but that is a long way from assuming that free is the norm
and anything else is incredible.

Gavin Deane

 

[Steve Pope]

I felt it was an unreasonable expectation that the standard *must*
be offered for free because there is a lot of work that goes into it.

Yes, although those working on it are not getting paid for working
on it. (They may be getting paid for something else, and that
something else may be related to the standard, but...)

The trend among standards groups is to not charge for standards,
or not charge for them after some interval of time (such as two
years) has elapsed (the IEEE taking the latter approach).

Steve

 

[Greg Comeau]

Covering costs is breaking even and not making profit. Also, I did not imply
that making profit from serving on the standards committee would be
inappropriate. I just wanted to point out that the analogy is broken if the
committee work does not yield profit.

Just an FYI that those "serving" on the committee do not make
any monies directly from the sales of a standard. Actually,
being on a committee costs members thousands of dollars each a year.
It is the standard's body (ANSI, ISO, BSO, AFNOR, etc) who "makes"
the money. But of course, they have offices, staff etc to pay
and this is one way to compensate for that. Note that committee
members do not work for standard bodies (well, I guess they could,
but that's different than being a _volunteer_ on a committee).

 

[Kai-Uwe Bux]

No. I felt it was an unreasonable expectation that the standard *must*
be offered for free because there is a lot of work that goes into it.
To suggest, as the OP did, that it is incredible (his word) that the
standard is not free struck me as unreasonable.

Of course it is up to the standards body whether to offer the standard
for free, but that is a long way from assuming that free is the norm
and anything else is incredible.

Now that I see what your point is, I have no problem agreeing with it.


Best

Kai-Uwe Bux