Tony Juricic <tonygeek@yahoo.com> writes:

Reading the latest SR1 proposal to C++ standard, explained in recent article by some Google corporate entity, I could not but feel sad:

Here we have corporate advertisers, pretending to be open source developers, defending half-assed, miniscule additions to C++ standards as a big improvenent.

Shame to Google and Boost and C++ standards commitee. IMO, you deserve as much respect as Microsoft corporate develpoers.

Your post is almost completely unintelligible. The only clear thing about it is that it's a scurrilous attack, which of course is quite destructive in itself. Just to deal with some of the points, to the degree that I understand what you're saying: - I've never heard of SR1. Perhaps you mean TR1? - Boost has no connection with Google. If "some Google corporate entity" wrote an article about the standard, it's not our fault. - The C++ standards committee has no connection with Google. If "some Google corporate entity" wrote an article about the standard, it's not our fault. - Boost and the C++ standards committee are composed entirely of volunteers. We do the best we can, and we have nothing to be ashamed of. Many people are better off for our efforts. If you think something can and should be done better, you're invited to try instead of taking potshots at the people who are actually committing time and energy to do the work. Your post violates both the letter of the Boost discussion guidelines and the spirit of the way we interact here -- not because you're criticizing Boost and the standards committee, but because your approach is vitriolic and inflammatory. I suggest you read http://www.boost.org/more/discussion_policy.htm to get familiar with the culture before posting again. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Moderator