On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 12:03 PM Oleksandr Koval <
oleksandr.koval.dev_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Sorry for intervention guys but Vinnie just mentioned a thing that was in
> my mind for a while:
>
>> for example, keeping it on GitHub
>
>
> ...I don't understand why put so much effort instead of simply
> implementing it on GitHub...
>

That's a sharp point and it touches on my question yet it stands adjacent.
What I am interested in is not the library and it is not the wording. What
I would like to know is the decision making process which led to
writing the paper. What was the measurement, the evidence, the rationale
for deciding this should go in the standard?

This is an important question, as when a library becomes standardized there
is a significant cost. Not just the perpetual cost of maintenance, but once
a library goes in then it is extremely difficult to make any changes which
would break ABI. We should never be in a hurry to standardize something as
the penalty for not getting it perfect is high. "No" should be the default
answer to questions of the form "should this be standardized." Only with
overwhelming evidence (measurements, deployment experience, user
testimonials, market survey) should the No become Yes.

Thanks