I hope we are not "developing" a standard to name and shame closed-source tools, or only for open source tools.

I would strongly recommend moving away from rationale of "closed source", or "I cannot check myself". We are aiming for an international standard, not a personal project.

-- Gaby

-----Original Message-----
From: SG15 <sg15-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Iain Sandoe via SG15
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2023 9:23 PM
To: René Ferdinand Rivera Morell <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]>
Cc: Iain Sandoe <iain_at_[hidden]>; Iain Sandoe via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [SG15] P2717R2, EcoIS Introspection for discussion.

Hi

> On 16 Jun 2023, at 03:40, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> I just uploaded the new revision of the paper at
> <https://wg21.link/P2717R2>. It has what I hope is something that
> covers all the major use situations.

It's not clear exactly what motivates "difficulty of adding new command line options to tools" in the table in 5.9.1.

e.g. while I am not particularly a fan of autotools, it is open source and modulo getting approval for patches, extensible to anyone with scripting language skills - so what additional constraints push it to "very hard"?

Iain

_______________________________________________
SG15 mailing list
SG15_at_[hidden]
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg15