Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 23:43:27 -0500
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 9:33 PM David Bakin via Std-Discussion <
std-discussion_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> My question is: why? What is - or are - the motivating use case(s) for
> this loophole?
>
What's the alternative? Not allowing specialization of member function
templates? That would be giving up a significant benefit for a dubious
gain.
Access restrictions are wrong in principle anyway. They invert the
chain of knowledge and wisdom, by presuming to know in the present that
it is good for a programmer in the future to be denied access. But the
programmer in the future is better situated to know what they need, and
should not be hampered by the chains of the past. Yet there are always
those who want to impose control over others.
std-discussion_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> My question is: why? What is - or are - the motivating use case(s) for
> this loophole?
>
What's the alternative? Not allowing specialization of member function
templates? That would be giving up a significant benefit for a dubious
gain.
Access restrictions are wrong in principle anyway. They invert the
chain of knowledge and wisdom, by presuming to know in the present that
it is good for a programmer in the future to be denied access. But the
programmer in the future is better situated to know what they need, and
should not be hampered by the chains of the past. Yet there are always
those who want to impose control over others.
Received on 2020-12-09 22:43:42