From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-30 21:02:48
At 08:43 PM 4/30/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>> To maximize the likelihood of acceptance, consider something like this:
>>
>> * Implement the feature in Wave, to establish actual implementation
>> experience. Perhaps keep a note of how much added Wave code is
>> required.
>>
>> * Let Wave users develop some experience with the feature, to find out
>> how useful and robust it is in practice.
>>
>> * Iterate the above, if the feature isn't quite right yet.
>>
>> * Do the same for other small PP features.
>>
>> * Write a unified proposal to the committee leaning heavily on the
>> existing practice that has been developed, with several Boosters as
>> co-authors.
>
>On the other hand, the lack of an implementation or any experience has
>not kept the EWG from intensely discussing a proposal for adding macro
>scoping, which IMO is a much bigger change than Vesa's proposing**. It
>would seem perverse to refuse to give equal attention to a proposal
>like Vesa's which is based the real need of a really heavy user of the
>preprocessor.
Regardless of whether PP proposals come in one-at-a-time or unified into a
single coherent proposal, if they are backed up by real-world
implementation and use experience they will stand a better chance of
actually making it all the way into the standard.
--Beman