From: Andreas Huber (ahd6974-spamgroupstrap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-08 03:57:00
David Abrahams <dave <at> boost-consulting.com> writes:
> >> Maybe, but you shouldn't feel guilty. The onus is on the proposer to
> >> come up with a good design.
> >
> > The question is: How far does a library author need to go in providing
> > evidence that the design is "good" (which often means different things
> > to different people, but lets ignore that for the moment)? Does a
> > proposer need to "prove" that the library design is the best currently
> > imaginable?
>
> A proposer needs to make a judgement call about which objections are
> worth trying to satisfy.
Agreed.
> > While this might be possible for some libraries I don't think it is
> > generally feasible. More specifically, if a raised point is so vague
> > that the library author is at a complete loss exactly how an
> > improvement could be implemented I think it is only fair to turn the
> > roles around and require the reviewer to at least outline how the
> > improvement is implementable within the given requirements.
>
> You can't "require" anything of the reviewer. It's okay to ask, of
> course.
I meant that the reviewer is "required" to elaborate *if* he wants to see his
point addressed.
Regards,
-- Andreas Huber When replying by private email, please remove the words spam and trap from the address shown in the header.