On 10/05/2024 13:41, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Niall Douglas wrote:
It is true I have been spectacularly unsuccessful at WG21. I have not affected one single word of normative text since I began attending meetings. The entire sum of my words affected would come from the next merge of the next C standard, where I have been far more effective with very considerably less work invested. Unsurprisingly, that's where I'll be moving to after the C 26 IS ships, as I'll have far more effect on the C++ standard from WG14 than I ever will from WG21.
What did you get into the C standard?
My biggest single direct contribution is fixing `fopen()`. I got defect resolutions merged into C23, and I have more improvements hopefully coming in C2y. Once I depart WG21, I have my magnus opus of standardisation coming: modernising signal handling, which will be mainly a WG14 based effort. Once I achieve that, I'll be moving on from standards (and probably be quite close to retirement by then). But it's wider than that. People on WG14 incorporate my advice and feedback including to wording. Several papers which were merged into the standard have included changes I suggested. I've also made suggestions about direction, and got consensus from the committee about that direction instead of being ignored or shouted at. It's nice to be listened to, and be taken seriously enough that people act on my suggestions. Myself and Boost have had a confrontational relationship in the past, but in my opinion (you and other will disagree), y'all after arguing heavily with me at the time then a few years later went ahead and quietly implemented almost everything I suggested. So I'm good with Boost at the present time - I spoke, you listened, you eventually implemented much of it. Rock on! Maybe WG21 will do what I suggest today a decade hence. I hope so. Niall