"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> wrote in message news:005701c65d76$40d9d6a0$6407a8c0@pdimov2...
Beman Dawes wrote:
The C++ Standards Committee met last week in Berlin, Germany. Of interest to Boosters:
Thank you for the extensive report.
I have one question that will help me (and possibly others) prioritize things better for October.
* All of TR1 except special functions has been voted into C++0x, the next standard.
What is the general procedure for evolving TR1 (now 0x) components further, and in particular, what is the fate of N1851, "Improving Usability and Performance of TR1 Smart Pointers", especially the allocator support section?
In addition to Howard's reply, keep in mind that part of the purpose of a TR is to gain experience with a component so that it can be further improved before being standardized. Thus everyone expects and welcomes further improvements TR1 components as they move into the Standard Library.. Mechanically, if it is a small improvement, write it up as a library issue, and send it to either comp.std.c++ or directly to Howard. If it is larger, write a paper, get a document number from Clark Nelson, and send it to him to be included in the next committee mailing.
In other words, should we spend significant time on improving (for example) shared_ptr, or should we focus on new, TR2 things, now that std::shared_ptr is almost set in stone?
Try to strike a balance between doing both. The October deadline for TR2 proposals does not require every i to be dotted and t to be crossed. If a proposal is in pretty good shape, and the LWG likes it, you will have a year or more to submit revisions polishing any weak areas or fixing minor problems. Also note that names of Boosters such as Peter Dimov, John Maddock, or other long time contributors carry a lot of weight with the LWG. --Beman