[std-proposals] Prep for C++ Standards meeting

[Robert Ramey]

As preparation of for the coming C++ Standards Meeting in San Diego, I
submit the following story by Arthur C. Clark

https://www.baen.com/Chapters/1439133476/1439133476___5.htm

And a beautiful audio version is here

Robert Ramey

[Hyman Rosen]

Post by Robert Ramey
As preparation of for the coming C++ Standards Meeting in San Diego, I
submit the following story by Arthur C. Clark
https://www.baen.com/Chapters/1439133476/1439133476___5.htm

Is it troubling that I can't figure out which of the two sides represents
C++? :-)

[Gašper Ažman]

The lesson I took is that if you don't think of integration as well as the
feature you end up losing the war.

I also think this supports the remember the Fortran paper.

It also supports all committee feedback that says "what is the impact of
this paper on that other paper" and "we can't merge this without
implementation and usage experience".

Post by Hyman Rosen

Post by Robert Ramey
As preparation of for the coming C++ Standards Meeting in San Diego, I
submit the following story by Arthur C. Clark
https://www.baen.com/Chapters/1439133476/1439133476___5.htm

Is it troubling that I can't figure out which of the two sides represents
C++? :-)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/CAHSYqdb%3DuCmKwq-ZTDr0xOXk7PmrLh6hM%3DXLZ5Jh2r-4ahafZA%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/CAHSYqdb%3DuCmKwq-ZTDr0xOXk7PmrLh6hM%3DXLZ5Jh2r-4ahafZA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.

[Hyman Rosen]

Post by Gašper Ažman
The lesson I took is that if you don't think of integration as well as the
feature you end up losing the war.
I also think this supports the remember the Fortran paper.
It also supports all committee feedback that says "what is the impact of
this paper on that other paper" and "we can't merge this without
implementation and usage experience".

The lesson I got is that if you take forever to get features in place
because you're
forever polishing and improving them, you're going to lose against
opponents who
are "building feverishly".

[Matthew Woehlke]

Post by Hyman Rosen
The lesson I got is that if you take forever to get features in
place because you're forever polishing and improving them, you're
going to lose against opponents who are "building feverishly".

I would have expressed it as 'chasing new (and unproven) features loses
to making incremental improvements on what is existing and tested'.

To give a more concrete example, using that story as a rationale I might
argue that we *should* standardize something like `#pragma once` (an
incremental improvement to "existing technology") and should *not* "get
caught up in" modules (a new, untested thing with tons of bugs to be
worked out).

[Robert Ramey]

Post by Matthew Woehlke

Post by Hyman Rosen
The lesson I got is that if you take forever to get features in
place because you're forever polishing and improving them, you're
going to lose against opponents who are "building feverishly".

I would have expressed it as 'chasing new (and unproven) features loses
to making incremental improvements on what is existing and tested'.
To give a more concrete example, using that story as a rationale I might
argue that we *should* standardize something like `#pragma once` (an
incremental improvement to "existing technology") and should *not* "get
caught up in" modules (a new, untested thing with tons of bugs to be
worked out).

Thanks for all the feedback. Basically I liked the story and it
reminded me of a number of projects I've been sucked into. It's too
hard to finish, so let's add another feature!

Maybe it's not a perfect analogy, but it reminded me as Bjarne's recent
"Vasa" paper. It seems to me that that paper has disappeared down the
memory hole. That is, everyone remembers it and many likely agree with
it, but no one thinks that it is relevant to them. I guess that's a
common feature of human nature as well.

Robert Ramey

[Gašper Ažman]

It reminded me of the "remember the Vasa" paper as well - in fact, I
thought it's a rather better analogy.

The problem with the Vasa analogy is that in some aspects, C++ is rather
like baroque interior design, and there are enhancements waiting to unify
and streamline the language into a more modern, "scandinavian" interior
design.

In other parts we're just missing things to do what we want, more like
punching a door through a wall to get from one side to the other side of a
building that required a long detour before.

Still in others, we're trying to add guardrails.

All those endeavors are *good* - the problem is when we end up with a nice
scandinavian staircase that half-leads to a hole in a wall and half into a
new guardrail because the architects aren't talking to one another. Hence
my "spend more time integrating" comment.

We remember the Vasa. We don't like that it's full of barnacles.

G

Post by Robert Ramey

Post by Matthew Woehlke

Post by Hyman Rosen
The lesson I got is that if you take forever to get features in
place because you're forever polishing and improving them, you're
going to lose against opponents who are "building feverishly".

I would have expressed it as 'chasing new (and unproven) features loses
to making incremental improvements on what is existing and tested'.
To give a more concrete example, using that story as a rationale I might
argue that we *should* standardize something like `#pragma once` (an
incremental improvement to "existing technology") and should *not* "get
caught up in" modules (a new, untested thing with tons of bugs to be
worked out).

Thanks for all the feedback. Basically I liked the story and it
reminded me of a number of projects I've been sucked into. It's too
hard to finish, so let's add another feature!
Maybe it's not a perfect analogy, but it reminded me as Bjarne's recent
"Vasa" paper. It seems to me that that paper has disappeared down the
memory hole. That is, everyone remembers it and many likely agree with
it, but no one thinks that it is relevant to them. I guess that's a
common feature of human nature as well.
Robert Ramey
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/pri7a9%24mcc%241%40blaine.gmane.org
.