220 19632 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Matthew Woehlke Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: try_realloc Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 11:07:54 -0400 Lines: 58 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <30f59ec7-0712-48fb-9df0-d66e3fe80c3c@isocpp.org> <2839762.j35TZXxY8Y@tjmaciei-mobl4> <20150802102813.GA6177@noemi.bahnhof.se> <7C86EFA3-F6B3-44B4-9B36-C2B583EBE43F@gmail.com> <15d79bb1-61b2-496d-ad8d-22d2c441b538@isocpp.org> <4D9A3974-B2CE-4C92-9C1E-10213AB67C53@gmail.com> <20150803000847.GA7843@noemi.bahnhof.se> <26ef5632-2004-498b-8212-f9cb8b7ad451@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1438700896 28022 80.91.229.3 (4 Aug 2015 15:08:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 15:08:16 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBC37LBFWUIFBBUVKQOXAKGQET4R2LSY@isocpp.org Tue Aug 04 17:08:03 2015 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 1ZMdox-0001eT-FW for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 17:08:03 +0200 Original-Received: by labth1 with SMTP id th1sf5394396lab.2 for ; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 08:08:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:date:lines:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:user-agent:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=zUvhkUyLApPj6Krqo6cRHaPIP8O+Z4S/rTEmF2rmQjk=; b=gxPvR8pTHtPF/M3Gc2ktn1p42GAi2otWy8qsAbXpbMp+a0Jpt+sdRAn6G/PB90UZUV RmD51ROuK8ZVQIN/mOXtwFTXwrXXm3hnVsVkcuMQXqrtOj3vgZeuckQGR1hfgFBsVP8R LNtHxSUtuWlC6szLY7jW8frSTBJ0iQ2NWqKJ2vb5F57A587N9Bpi9QZ8VtKgT57YeEqD +SZd01w0IFkqGsCKIFwr5kDWAi729rFrTBIAT9pX5e2a3XME1Lsz361IQM7DNWVCuDLg zNRdoAkXkp+03sO3312BEAyERPFwIKHadwg7RXuRmUwuOEYhHGa7ZLhlZ/axBPqMHOBP X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmp3tjnZepvX3Wg92YcFnpjGRGK3wtuBlIknrZaMSPhwdDiKgdfPizjxuyIWKnzjDLCRtEF X-Received: by 10.112.13.200 with SMTP id j8mr1257495lbc.14.1438700883145; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 08:08:03 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.152.30.102 with SMTP id r6ls63687lah.100.gmail; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 08:08:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.112.12.233 with SMTP id b9mr4008191lbc.91.1438700881644; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 08:08:01 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org. [80.91.229.3]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t6si883576lae.163.2015.08.04.08.08.01 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Aug 2015 08:08:01 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender) client-ip=80.91.229.3; Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZMdou-0001cn-Bv for std-proposals@isocpp.org; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 17:08:00 +0200 Original-Received: from tripoint.kitware.com ([66.194.253.20]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 17:08:00 +0200 Original-Received: from mwoehlke.floss by tripoint.kitware.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Aug 2015 17:08:00 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 49 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: tripoint.kitware.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 In-Reply-To: <26ef5632-2004-498b-8212-f9cb8b7ad451@isocpp.org> X-Original-Sender: mwoehlke.floss@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; dmarc=fail (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-Spam-Checked-In-Group: std-proposals@isocpp.org 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:19632 Archived-At: On 2015-08-03 21:44, isocppgroup@denisbider.com wrote: > We're using 1980s, 1990s era technology! Right now, we're communicating > through... Google Groups! A most basic, free online service! > > Nothing we're doing here; nothing in the way we communicate; could not have > been done on Usenet, or on a Bulletin Board System in the 1980s. Funny you should put it that way... ;-) *You* may be using Google's atrocious web interface. *I'm* using NNTP via gmane.org, because NNTP is still the best way to deal with high-volume mailing lists. And mailing lists are a de-facto standard for online collaboration. They're effective, easy to use, and open access. A specialized system *might* be more effective in some ways, but at the cost of raising the bar to entry; the very thing you are ranting against! (But see also comments below.) If you don't believe me, just take a look at how many lists gmane.org carries. It's a *lot*, and they're all software related. New isn't *always* better... though I have to be honest, I'd also prefer if there was the possibility to make a proposal without going to a week-long meeting in a remote location. Also, responding to a comment you made on your blog: > I think charging for proposals actually sounds like a really good > idea. Why should I be able to litter a working group mailing list > with whatever weird proposal I might fancy, that no one else likes, > or is going to accept? This is effectively what requiring people to present proposals face to face *does*. If you've been around the list (or any open internet forum) for a while, you'll notice that one problem with truly open, low-or-zero entry cost forums is that they *do* attract all sorts of people, from the serious to the outrageous. Some of the benefit of a higher entry cost venue is that it *does* weed out people that aren't serious, or at least willing to make the effort to be taken seriously. What would probably help is to have multiple levels of participation with increasing "cost of entry", with changes happening only at the highest level, but with more upwards filtration from the lower levels, e.g. people at the higher levels who cherry pick valuable suggestions from the lower levels and champion them. (The problem, of course, is that there isn't enough manpower at the top; everyone is already overloaded with their own stuff and rarely has time to take on anything else.) -- Matthew -- --- 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/. .