Re: [boost] Re: compile-time binary constants

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-19 20:50:02

At 07:00 AM 1/19/2003, Gennaro Prota wrote:

 >Yes, I would be glad to write a formal proposal. But, as it has been
 >repeatedly pointed out on comp.std.c++, this is not enough if you are
 >not in the committee and that, de facto, there are very little chances
 >for the proposal to be approved if you are not present to defend it
 >and respond to questions and, above all, objections.

That isn't entirely correct. It true that it is awfully hard to get a 
proposal through unless there are people present who understand the 
proposal in serious detail, but they don't have to be the proposal's 
authors.

For example, John Maddock has made a number of proposals, and all seem 
likely to be accepted. John could well end up with more accepted proposals 
for the TR than anyone else, and he is also a co-author of a static assert 
proposal likely to become part of the core language. Yet John has never 
attended a meeting AFAIK. (I hope we can convince him to come to the Oxford 
meeting!)

John's proposals meet real needs, are clearly worded, and are carefully 
researched. He makes sure there are others on the committee who understand 
the proposals, and can present them to the rest of the committee. He 
participates in the committee's email reflectors, answering questions as 
they come up.

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.

--Beman