The ISO member bodies don't charge any fees to be a member then?
> As for the corporations, that is life, name one successful programming language without corporation backing.
That isn't even the point, the issue is with these companies being on the board of directors, it seems you've resigned yourself to allow big tech companies to take control over Rust.
You can have companies and individuals donate to a project without placing them on the board, and it seems that with Rust you can't even donate.
Depends on the ISO work group, in what concerns C and C++, they don't charge for it, but it is up to you to cover for your travel expenses and vacation days to defend your papers. This is where corporation (or employeer) sponsorship comes into play.
That is pretty much the point, given that there are no successfull programing languages in existence without companies financial support for their core team.
Don't twist my words, I explicitly stated that is not the case for C and C++.
Your point is the one that is irrelevant, because your are yet to point out a successful programming language on the market according to your world vision.
So in general for ISO you do have to pay for fees, saying "not the case for C and C++" does not mean they don't do it at all, please don't move goal posts.
> Your point is the one that is irrelevant, because your are yet to point out a successful programming language on the market according to your world vision.
Is it? I still don't see your point, It seems you've just listed a bunch of languages when I am talking about big tech companies that are joining the board of directors of a foundation that you cannot even support as an individual, let alone have any say on.
I am not moving goal posts, we are discussing about Rust here, C and C++ WG members don't pay for membership, the languages Rust is trying to replace, but apparently it doesn't fit into your world view.
Again, please provide a famous programming language thriving on the market that fits your beloved world view.
If you don't have any to share, windmills are over there.
Please look at this thread again because you brought up ISO and ECMA to derail the thread and it turns out you have to pay to have a say in it, after you said that:
> There is no payment to be a member in ISO.
So why bring this up in the first place? and now you're sprinkling clarifications afterwards. When are you going to admit that what you said is incorrect?
> ...We are discussing about Rust here, C and C++ WG members don't pay for membership.
Incorrect, we are talking about the Rust foundation. Which covers more than just the language.
Again, what difference does this make in you having a say as a community member? Seems like you need to join a big company to have a say, because that's all I see.
> Again, please provide a famous programming language thriving on the market that fits your beloved world view.
So R does not count as a famous thriving programming language that is driven by the community (not corporations) and allows donations? You're more likely to have a say on R than on C, C++ and now Rust.
To be clear: the Rust foundation does not control any technical decision making in the Rust project. Anyone willing to open an RFC on GitHub has the opportunity to influence the development of Rust, and that has not changed.
