🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <45f60e$mtp@stc06.ctd.ornl.gov> kennel@msr.epm.ornl.gov writes:

> > The committee doesn't operate in terms of `requests for proposals'
> > in the sense I think you mean. 

> So who sets the agenda of its scope?  And what defines proposals?

Its members.  Pragmatically, to get a proposal accepted by the
committee, you must make the proposal available in writing about
six weeks before the meeting and then go to the meeting to present
your point of view in person.  It helps if you are a member of the
committee, but is not required.  In principle it is possible to
get a proposal accepted without being there, but it is very hard
unless you can convince a member to advance it for you.

> > After all, if you want semantically safe languages that are fundamentally
> > different from C, you don't have to look very far.

> Perhaps the ISO standard should require that all conforming 
> implementations' marketing documents include these two paragraphs.

Perhaps it should.  You are welcome to come to the next meeting to
argue that viewpoint.  It's in Tokyo during the first week of November.

> My personal opinion: sometimes C++ has suffered when it made some
> provision for "conceptual compatibility with C" when amplifying and
> continuing such behavior turns out (IMO) to be a mistake in context of
> C++.  For instance, automatic conversions.  I would have preferred that
> there be no implicit conversions, and the ones in C be allowed to remain
> as a 'deprecated' feature. 

I don't know of *anyone* who is completely satisfied with C++ as it
stands.  Where we get into trouble is trying to get people to agree
as to how they would like it to change.

Wasn't it Churchill who said that democracy is the worst political
system in the world except for all the others?

> When it cameto tightening up static type checking and other similar issues
> there didn't seem to be much hesitation by the committee toward promoting
> safety. 

Static type checking carries no run time penalty.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@research.att.com