220 12122 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tony V E Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: std::order -- what do you think? Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 13:02:26 -0400 Lines: 110 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <0ba9643b-7a18-4ab6-a8f7-caec2450c061@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0117744bdc824c04ff6c1e06 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1406739758 15211 80.91.229.3 (30 Jul 2014 17:02:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 17:02:38 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCUZ5QWKNQIKFSXETYCRUBD4ZLPKU@isocpp.org Wed Jul 30 19:02:31 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-la0-f69.google.com ([209.85.215.69]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XCXGl-0000n6-Oh for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 19:02:27 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-la0-f69.google.com with SMTP id s18sf1020388lam.4 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:02:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=0v9tBHXouBCst/p3P61vmmmcTZdrCOEKLd/PO/ZHj+I=; b=AI2ddvHVm/3BnbrTCayXQ3sGFQeZ3GyIOmSGTeluop7sQwTQ6H3lUks3JiZI4VFdeq LeudT3gbpyObc5E0R4obleRf/00qTEjtGBp0r9ATguYuGO1CKjzQHBuNm2QMICFqk6vI 7d9C9+sNWoFUjusyv7OgQZ5NoAu4EaCfcQCeo6vW9IqyAjyklv50q8F2ijeEFeQMD9+y LM2sYFJxwonnz+XVyR3n+AlXRYnpAPvK/mKc+/OA8pNkBBf6634OmOhAPlL3Z9rdzhaz ZRBtEVrFUuXHMLmqape9RirqEBSL5A3kYZ2c3QKeLgdlYzjKdkr+fagmknRDUTuE3F6K o0hA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk3pVMrFwPMXPCTNysTC0rODdl1KZxeeek5LizBPXBpkIFWiXbmxIbEwfJuIUfqt6Pj8OGL X-Received: by 10.194.3.34 with SMTP id 2mr587471wjz.4.1406739747565; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:02:27 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.152.120.229 with SMTP id lf5ls132527lab.15.gmail; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:02:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.112.239.41 with SMTP id vp9mr6008361lbc.8.1406739746498; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-lb0-x22d.google.com (mail-lb0-x22d.google.com [2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h7si9586942lbs.67.2014.07.30.10.02.26 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of tvaneerd@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d; Original-Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id p9so1121518lbv.18 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:02:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.152.170.132 with SMTP id am4mr6115614lac.15.1406739746159; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.113.4.162 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:02:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: tvaneerd@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of tvaneerd@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d as permitted sender) smtp.mail=tvaneerd@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:12122 Archived-At: --089e0117744bdc824c04ff6c1e06 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Ville Voutilainen < ville.voutilainen@gmail.com> wrote: > On 30 July 2014 19:40, Tony V E wrote: > >> > Basically, we need to decide if "like T" is an attainable design goal > >> > (and > >> > without overloaded operator . it isn't), and whether getting half-way > >> > there > >> > is a benefit or a hindrance. > >> Funny, it seems to me that LEWG has decided that a couple of times > >> already. > > What did it decide? benefit or hindrance? both? > > Seems to have decided half-way there. > > Thus far it seems to me that LEWG has decided to include the relational > operators. Well LEWG decided to do it one way, then LWG decided to do it the other way. But I'm not bitter. :-) > So I don't know who's this "we" who need to decide it yet > again. > > > Yes, I agree they have decided a number of times. > > I expect they will decide a couple more times. :) Unless, of course, people > stop rehashing every single part of the design, but perhaps that's too high > a hope. > > Well, once it moves from TS to standard, we can _maybe_ stop. -- --- 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 email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. --089e0117744bdc824c04ff6c1e06 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Ville Voutilainen <vil= le.voutilainen@gmail.com> wrote:
On 30 July 2014 19:40, Tony = V E <tvaneerd@gmail.com> wr= ote:
>> > Basically, we need to decide if "like T" is an atta= inable design goal
>> > (and
>> > without overloaded operator . it isn't), and whether gett= ing half-way
>> > there
>> > is a benefit or a hindrance.
>> Funny, it seems to me that LEWG has decided that a couple of times=
>> already.
> What did it decide? benefit or hindrance? both?
> Seems to have decided half-way there.

Thus far it seems to me that LEWG has decided to include the relation= al
operators.

Well LEWG decided to do it one w= ay, then LWG decided to do it the other way.=C2=A0 But I'm not bitter. = :-)
=C2=A0
So I don't know who's this "we" who need to decide it ye= t
again.

> Yes, I agree they have decided a number of times.

I expect they will decide a couple more times. :) Unless, of course, = people
stop rehashing every single part of the design, but perhaps that's too = high
a hope.

<= br>
Well, once it moves from TS to standard, we can _maybe_ stop.=

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposa= ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<= /a>.
--089e0117744bdc824c04ff6c1e06-- .