C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [Tooling] Proposed mission

From: David Sankel <camior_at_[hidden]>
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 20:08:02 -0400
Thanks for this Ville. It is always interesting to learn about different
slices of the C++ community.

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Ville Voutilainen <
ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I'm not suggesting that we should never make breaking changes. I am
> suggesting that we should have bloody strong and good
> reasons for them, and "this was found to be confusing to some users
> here and there" doesn't even begin to cut it, and
> "you can migrate with a tool" is an answer that gets laughed/scoffed
> at or derided in my usual stomping grounds.

How would folks react in your usual stomping grounds to the addition of a
'std::ranges::sort' function that works on iterators, but is only slightly
and subtly different from 'std::sort'? What if there's a third sort,
'std::we_really_got_it_right_this_time::sort', to add to the mix?
Similarly, how would they react to having a 'std::vector',
'std::pmr::vector', and possibly a 'std2::vector'? Are these acceptable for
these folks?



Received on 2018-04-04 02:08:44