Title: Time for Change

It would be nice if this could be extended to cover rather more than it currently does but that much depends on contributions from members. In future I would like to see it summarise joining our news groups/reflectors, list members who are willing to give help with specific areas as well as cover statements of ACCU policy, the ACCU Constitution and general membership contact details. If you have something for the next annual issue the time for sending it in is now.

This specialist newsletter for users/developers of/for Acorn RISC based hardware has been very successful as a niche publication. Now that Acorn has pulled out of the desktop market its future maybe limited but I see no great reason for interfering with something that currently seems to meet the needs of a substantial number of members. However it is unlikely that there will be future disks to go along with this publication. Though disks are themselves relatively cheap, duplicating and distributing them to a relatively small number of people is more costly. Perhaps the way forward here is for CAUGers members with Internet access to use that for software etc. that would previously have been placed on a disk. Those without might find some (local) member who could copy the material to a disk for them. We are an organisation of people who provide support to each other and this would seem just one more way in which such support could be offered.

While the content of this publication has settled down to that appropriate to serious users of C++ and it has an excellent USA based editor I think that we should be wary of complacency. The number of contributors is very limited. There is a vast area that can/should be tackled and I am sure that there are quite a few who could put fingers to keyboard to add something. If you have any doubts about Overload's vulnerability, look back at the last six issues and remove all material written by me, by The Harpist and derived from those contributions. I think this degree of reliance on the contributions of two writers is unhealthy.

Even if what you write is based on a misconception or erroneous view the result can still be very beneficial. It is only as a consequence of the current 'pontifications' on the subject of Exception Specifications that I, for one, am beginning to get a clear idea as to what needs to be done to fix these so that they are as useful as The Harpist seems to think they already are.

This is clearly the problem publication. It has grown from being a fairly simple publication during the first couple of years of its existence into something that attempts to meet the needs of to diverse a range of individuals. I know that more members than I would wish simply put their copies to one side and let them gather dust. I know of several ex-members who resigned because they felt that paying half their money for something they never read detracted from the value of those things they did read. I think that the time has come for a radical rethink. The following is my current thinking on this issue.

Obviously a lot of thought needs to go into making changes of this kind. We also need committed volunteers to run/edit each publication. That responsibility would be largely commissioning suitable articles, creating and managing Q&A sections (though with help from appropriate experts) collating and responding to letters etc. Once a publication was down to page proofs/masters (possibly electronic rather than hardcopy) someone such as myself could manage publication/distribution.

If ACCU takes this direction for future hardcopy publication (by the way all my experience says that, despite the convenience of immediate softcopy publication on the Internet we require the discipline of hardcopy publication to fixed copydates) I think we need to change the ACCU Officers to provide a 'Publications & Distributions Officer' to replace 'C Vu Editor'. That requires an amendment to the ACCU Constitution.

We already have our own permanently connected web site (www.accu.org) but I do not think we are yet making best use of it. Quite apart from our own material it would be useful to make it a good jump-station to other relevant sites.

Currently the contents of the site are almost entirely on open access. As the Web grows I think we will see an increasing number of sites that provide good quality information/links but restrict access to some group. I think we need to give serious consideration to providing a three-level site:

We already have accu-announce and accu-general. The latter anti-dates our web site by several years but unfortunately provides no added-value to members because anyone can subscribe (and quite a few of the regulars are not and never have been members, something that I find mildly irritating but that is just my prejudice).

What I would like to see us develop is a number of members only groups (should limit the noise ratio) for specific purposes. Indeed we should have a mechanism in place whereby any member can ask for a group to be set up with themselves as founder member. A written charter of the purpose of the group is desirable.

One special case I would like to see is one (or more) groups set up to help students with their programming. I do not mean groups where more expert members do student member's homeworkJ I mean groups where student (in the broadest sense) can seek help such as hints, sources of information, explanations of code that does not work etc. In other words all the things that a good academic department would provide anyway. But many students have the misfortune to being supervised by the terminally incompetent.

To summarise: we should seek ways of using our Internet resources and web site to provide added value to membership of ACCU.

Members paying fees to support standardisation of C, C++ etc. can apply for special privileges. For example it is a long established right of those actively involved in a standardisation process that they have access to relevant documentation. For example, anyone who participates in C standardisation work is entitled to an electronic copy of the C++ Standard, just as anyone involved in C++ standardisation is entitled to access to the working documents of WG14 (responsible for the next C standard).

If you wish to exercise those rights and are a participant in the UK effort by virtue of having paid your supplement to the ISDF then contact Neil Martin (<neilm@plumhall.demon.co.uk>). If you want to acquire those rights contact the Membership Secretary (<davidhodge@compuserve.com>) re ISDF supplement.