On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 19:18, Artur Czajkowski via Std-Discussion
<std-discussion_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> True. I believe one you've suggested with gperf is one possibility.
> But I wasn't talking about that particular case. I was rather talking about the way you've expressed yourself with that arrogant and almost dismissive way about what std committee is and what is its role. And exactly that kind of attitude I met a number of times from members of the committee. There were times that I've heard that nobody is paid for being in committee so how can I expect something of quality etc. Upsetting, saddening... but real...
> We could discuss it here till the cows come home who is right, what is right and who is wrong and why it is me...
> For years now I'm observing what is happening to the C++ and to be honest, the language that I loved committee by its "wrong doings" to it, made the language that I'm now trying to leave behind and move towards Rust.
> In my opinion most people who put in their "some/any sort of CV" fact that they are members of the std committee should say: I'm in the committee that is destroying C++ instead.
> Perhaps it is a bit melo-dramatic but I used to love C++. Now some parts of it because of the committee are awful/ugly, some funny, some buggy and none of them seem to be one part of one cohesive language.
> Shame on them.

What any of this has to do with a question about a large
initializer_list of strings taking a long time to compile
is completely beyond me.