On 13 Dec 2025 21:23, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Andrey Semashev wrote:
I think, this discussion will end with nothing, as we had it before. If we want to change the status quo, we need to come to a community decision on what to do. The process we have for this is a review.
I don't see what's there to review.
core::string_view is more than eligible for being a documented component. It's being used by 8 Boost libraries in their user-facing API. This is exactly what Core was created for.
Even if we applied an unreasonably high standard for what needs to go into Core - and we don't - it still clears it.
I can see no technical or procedural justification for objecting to core::string_view.
You know very well that the issue is not the technical qualities of core::string_view.
At this point, I'm inclined to start to think that objections are malicious in nature.
It sounds like you're accusing someone (me in particular, perhaps?) of sabotaging your work due to difference in opinion. Is this the case? If so, why don't you just go ahead and do whatever you think is right? What's the point in discussing things anyway, when there are only two opinions, yours and wrong? Honestly, at this point I'm this close to just giving up on this topic, and probably Boost.Core as well. But maybe that's exactly what people want.
Amusingly, the "official" boost::string_view is only used twice, and one of these is probably a mistake that should be rectified. :-)
If the community overwhelmingly prefers core::string_view over boost::string_view, a review of a proposal to replace the latter with the former would surely show that. That's the point of the review - to gain community-wide consensus and then act on it. A review is also a way to overcome a difference in opinion, as the review manager has the power to choose whatever he thinks is right, even if that decision is not universally popular. Anyway, I'm done with this argument. I've said enough already and I've tried to suggest arbitration in the form of a review. You can do whatever.