C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [wg14/wg21 liaison] labels

From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 17:39:04 +0300
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 at 17:32, Uecker, Martin
<Martin.Uecker_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > 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?
> Well, if WG14, as the ISO committee in charge for C, which
> is full of C experts (including implementors, users, tool
> makers, etc.), after careful discussion just made
> a decision to make a change to the C language (which
> is rare enough), it is completely inappropriate - in my
> humble opinion - if the first reaction from the C++ side
> is to rant about how unnecessary and unjustified this
> change was.

Well, calling skepticism about the necessity and justification of the
change a rant
suggests that we are fairly far from collaboration. In case such
skepticism on this mailing
list is considered inappropriate, I can certainly write papers
addressing WG14 or/and file
NB comments on the drafts of the C standard.

> > > It would be worth for the sake of compatibility.
> > It seems like we're talking about fixing an incompatibility that has
> > been recently introduced.
> ...while fixing a much bigger incompatibility.

That fix is orthogonal to the introduced incompabitility, as far as I can see.

Received on 2020-08-12 09:42:39