From: Andreas Huber (ahd6974-spamgroupstrap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-08 03:57:00
David Abrahams <dave <at> boost-consulting.com> writes:
> >> Maybe, but you shouldn't feel guilty. The onus is on the proposer to
> >> come up with a good design.
> > The question is: How far does a library author need to go in providing
> > evidence that the design is "good" (which often means different things
> > to different people, but lets ignore that for the moment)? Does a
> > proposer need to "prove" that the library design is the best currently
> > imaginable?
> A proposer needs to make a judgement call about which objections are
> worth trying to satisfy.
> > While this might be possible for some libraries I don't think it is
> > generally feasible. More specifically, if a raised point is so vague
> > that the library author is at a complete loss exactly how an
> > improvement could be implemented I think it is only fair to turn the
> > roles around and require the reviewer to at least outline how the
> > improvement is implementable within the given requirements.
> You can't "require" anything of the reviewer. It's okay to ask, of
I meant that the reviewer is "required" to elaborate *if* he wants to see his
-- Andreas Huber When replying by private email, please remove the words spam and trap from the address shown in the header.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk