C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [wg14/wg21 liaison] labels

From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 17:09:17 +0300
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 at 16:55, Uecker, Martin
<Martin.Uecker_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > cost/benefit ratio of that change in C is all that great.
> WG14, which is much more conservative with respect
> to changes in the language than WG21, obviously
> thought differently.
> In my opinion, this decision simply needs to be
> respected by participants of the discussion.
> Otherwise, I think there is not much
> basis for a collaboration.

I wonder what the definition of "decision simply needs to be
respected" is, and what room for collaboration
it leaves. Perhaps you could elaborate on that, so that I don't go
into hypotheticals?

> > I don't see this change as anything really sinister or having wide
> > impact, modulo implementation churn;
> > it seems to be a miniature usability improvement. At the end of it, it becomes
> > a question of whether it's worth doing when everybody can just add the
> > null statements where required, and it's
> > not hard to find why and how to do that.
> It would be worth for the sake of compatibility.

It seems like we're talking about fixing an incompatibility that has
been recently introduced.

Received on 2020-08-12 09:12:52