Re: [boost] [xint] Boost.XInt formal review (Chad Nelson)

Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] Boost.XInt formal review (Chad Nelson)
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-07 16:18:56

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 08:37, Stewart, Robert <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> That you took someone's (strongly expressed?) opinion as "instructions" was clearly a mistake. Â If they convinced you, then you should stand by the decision. Â If not, you shouldn't change for their sake. Â Obviously, researching the list to discover how well received a poster's opinions are and how much in line their suggestions are with existing Boost opinion and practice will help you maximize the chance of acceptance.
>

+1

Any change a library author makes but doesn't personally agree with --
whether it's the majority opinion on the list or not -- is going to
cause problems in the review since the author can't justify it to the
inevitible questioning.

I stopped participating heavily around version 3 or 4, but a quick
look at my history suggests that at various points I suggested signed
zeros, not having signed zeros, a policy-based design, and multiple
types.  If even one person can't be consistent (though I'm sure I had
what I thought were good reasons at the time), then there's no way the
whole list can be :)

~ Scott