Re: [boost] Re: Re: Policy-based smart pointers revisisted

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-21 10:07:20

"Paul Mensonides" <pmenso57_at_[hidden]> writes:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]>
>
>> >> Argument is very different from derision.  I think it would be very
>> >> foolish to deride Andrei's opinions, which usually have something very
>> >> incisive behind them.
>> >
>> > Agreed, but that is more-or-less what happened.  Andrei asked for an
>> > example that justified the design.  No one could produce one.  The
>> > best anyone could do was say "it's like the STL, so that must be
>> > good," and "we might need the generality if the future."
>>
>> That's *not* derision, Paul.
>
> No, it isn't.  That was just the arguments that were made in favor of the
> sequence abstraction.  

It's a long, long stretch from "arguments that were made in favor of
the sequence abstraction" to "andrei's opinion was derided."  It's
that kind of hyperbole which I'm trying to put a stop to, because I
think is making this whole thing much more difficult than it ought to
be.

>> > Once again, I don't want to get into an argument about this
>> > particular issue, I'm only pointing out that people tend to respond
>> > harshly when their designs (or favored designs) are questioned.
>> > Simple as that.  I'm not immune and neither are you.
>>
>> Agreed, but there's no example of harshness here AFAICT.
>
> I know.  

Then why are you bringing it up?

>> You're claiming somebody said that; fine, I believe you.  That's not
>> "how boost treats Andrei", it's just what somebody said.  It's not
>> particularly sympathetic, I'll grant you that.
>
> It was said by Aleksey, I believe, but that I'm not trying to point
> fingers here--everybody gets frustrated.  

If it's just something you believe, I would appreciate it if you'd
check your facts.  I'm not trying to back up Aleksey here, because I
*know* he got frustrated in that discussion, but my perception is that
this whole deal is characterized by a kind of exaggeration and
misinterpretation, and that it would get better if you (and maybe
Andrei) were looking more at what was actually said and less at how
you feel about it.

> I'm simply saying that periodically things escalate to the point
> where expressing an opinion is considered inflammatory if it isn't
> the "right" opinion,

Considered inflammatory by whom?

> and that seems to have happened to Andrei more than most.  

Are you suggesting that he's been censored or reprimanded because of
his opinions?  If you are, that's a very serious allegation, and I
request that you give citations.

> I'm not worried about myself here.  When I make comments about
> design, I usually only consider them to be token responses, because
> I am not an expert, while you, Aleksey, Andrei, etc., are.

It's hard to reconcile that statement with the strength and authority
with which I know you to hold your opinions (comes with the territory
of youth and brilliance, I think).

>> Probably true; people don't tend to feel their opinions are being
>> well-received when the majority disagrees with them.
>
> That is part of it, yes.  The difference is when certain issues
> don't get addressed in a reasonable manner.  A.k.a. the "justifying
> example."  It was not Andrei's job to disprove the validity of the
> design, it was the people promoting the design's job to show the
> viability of it.  

True.  Refusing to engage in an argument is a long way from derision.

> My whole point, from the beginning of this little fiasco, was that I
> didn't think Andrei was coming from nowhere when he said that.  I
> have noticed it as well--not directed at me, but Andrei.  

OK, I agree with you.  It's not entirely unfounded.  Andrei has said
some things on this list, mostly non-technical in nature, which have
ruffled feathers.  I wouldn't be surprised at all if that makes people
less predisposed to accept his technical arguments.  That's why I'm
trying to encourage him to dispense with the non-technical static.

> I can't say whether it was intentional or just misinterpreted, just
> that I've noticed it.  I'd like to see Andrei officially become a
> "non-lurker," because I think he has a lot to offer.  

Me too.

> I also think that people shouldn't have to stifle their own
> viewpoints in order to "get along."  

It's a fact of life that people may need to learn how to adjust the
way their viewpoints are expressed in order to get along.

> That was never my point, nor do I think it was Andrei's.  I think
> Andrei's point was more along the lines of, "just because _you_
> don't need it doesn't mean that somebody else doesn't."  Which, is
> greatly coincidental with the whole MPL thing and therefore
> amusing. ;)

Which just pushes the "politics" button again.  Nobody really enjoys
that as we've seen.  Let's try to put that stuff aside get back to
what we all *want* to be doing here, please!

-- 
                       David Abrahams
   dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution