From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-26 11:18:56
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
| > "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| > news:d4k44t$9b9$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
| > | "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| > | news:d4gi2c$2jd$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
| > | > In Lillehammer we rejected a policy-based smart pointer...
| > | That isn't what happened. The committee's wiki describes the LWG's
| > | position:
| > | "No support for a policy-based framework at this time. This is a
| > | refinement of Loki, but, while Loki is in use, this refinement
| > | isn't. We'll consider such a proposal later, if there is widespread
| > | practice and strong arguments for it."
| > | "No support ... at this time." is very different from rejection.
| > maybe, I didn't mention why it was "rejected" but I don't see any
| > conceptual difference; I strongly encourage people to not write a
| > proposal before they know the committee are willing to accept it.
| Speaking as someone who has been involved in this process since 1996,
| IMO that's very bad advice. There's hardly any way to even get an
| inkling of whether the committee are willing to accept most proposals
| without writing and submitting them.
Well, both me and Doug asked explicitly about our respective libraries.
I got a "not yet" and he got an "ok". That's easy; no time wasted.
| > I see it like this: we are very limited in resources in the library
| > working group and we want to focus on libraries that can be used by
| > as many users as possible. And that means a policy-based smart
| > pointer is probably not going into the standard.
| To all who are reading: I just want to emphasize that this is
| Thorsten's personal viewpoint and doesn't neccessarily reflect the
| opinion of others.
What else could "I see it like this" possibly mean? That it was your
> I don't mind doing work for free---as long as it is not waisted;
| > waisted work would **** me off.
| If you want to be sure to avoid wasted work you need to participate in
| the committee process and build consensus on the reflectors between
| meetings... and even then it is possible to fail. Dave H. didn't do
| that AFAICT. There's no good reason to think that Andrei's impression
| that "people really liked the idea" should be enough to ensure that
| the next proposal would be accepted.
but how should people know if their proposal has got a chance if not by
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk