On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 20:50:02 -0500, Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If you have a reasonable, useful, proposal then don't worry about getting >it presented to the committee. Sure, it helps to be there in person, but >there are plenty of existence proof's that attendance isn't a requirement. Thanks for the clear information. I have to say, then, that we should acknowledge some communication problem between the committee and the "public": though I'm one that tries to keep abreast of the committee work and follow the main C++ newsgroups I can't sometimes do without thinking that the criteria used to reject/approve some proposal are inexplicable. Just to give you some examples, introduction of "new features" (i.e. things that are not established practice) is usually not even considered; this is because the purpose of standardization should not be to "invent" but, exactly, to "standardize"; now who implemented "export" before standardization? What about exception specifications? What about Koenig lookup (and "extended" Koenig lookup)? Also think e.g. to B. Stroustrup's recent articles in CUJ, where he proposes, among other things, to introduce a new wchar keyword and to allow implicit void* -> pointer-to-object conversion. Call me mischievous, but would such ideas have been taken into serious consideration if they didn't came from a person of the calibre and authority of Bjarne Stroustrup?. The impression we get, from this other side of the "fence", is that a lot of "criteria" used for acceptance (is useful, is implemented by some major compiler, doesn't break backward compatibility, etc.) are often just used as excuses to reject proposal on an opinion basis. I'm not saying this is the truth, but this is definitely the impression I get from outside. If this just a communication problem as I said, then something should be done I think, because the situation is discouraging for people who want to propose new ideas. Genny. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
