4 ms·
I'm not asking the standards committees to develop them for free. They were already developed! I'm saying that the committees should acknowledge their existence
by modeless 1y ago
I'm not asking the standards committees to develop them for free. They were already developed! I'm saying that the committees should acknowledge their existence, and the fact that they solve some of C/C++'s biggest problems, in some ways better than the committee-blessed solutions. They deserve attention from the committees to direct language evolution in ways that support them better and encourage alternative implementations.
- motorest 1y ago> 'm not asking the standards committees to develop them for free. They were already developed! That's great to hear. It sounds like you have everything set to put together a proposal. Do you have any timeline in mind to present something? > I'm saying that the committees should acknowledge their existence, (...) Oh does this mean any of the tools you're praising was already proposed to be included in the standard? Do you mind linking to the draft proposal? It's a mailing list, and all it takes is a single email, so it should be easy to link. Where's the link? https://isocpp.org/std/submit-a-proposal https://isocpp.org/std/submit-a-proposal
- wakawaka28 1y agoI was referring to this: >Both zapcc and Fil-C could benefit from the involvement of the standards committee. What exactly does the standards committee do for these software projects without being involved in their development? I think there is nothing to do here that is within the scope of the language itself. Of course, if the creators of those projects come up with a cool new idea, they can submit to the standards committee for comment. They can also comment on new standards that make the tools not work anymore. But that is help going from the project to the committee, not the other way around.