Remix.run Logo
▲ uecker 2 hours ago

Well, you could start to help? (instead of just being there to make sure special interests are preserved in voting)

I also do not see where the quality suffered. There were some rather minor issues we created and need to cleaned up.

▲jcranmer 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> (instead of just being there to make sure special interests are preserved in voting)

This kind of attitude tends to make me suspect that you are disinclined to actually listen to my feedback.

▲uecker 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Prove it. Aaron told me explicitly that he was inviting people because he was not happy that there are too many with a user view point. And then a couple people show up that never contribute papers but consistently vote for some special interest.

▲jcranmer an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I joined WG14 and WG21 because I was worried that there were not enough people on either committees who had the perspective of someone who works in middle-end optimization rather than the frontend. I haven't written any papers for WG14 because so far all of the feedback I need to give can easily be given merely by discussion on the reflector or during the paper discussions (this is not the case for WG21, and I have consequently written papers for them), and--as a middle-end person--there is actually relatively little feature development for me to specifically propose. Most of the big features I'd want to see included already have active proposals (e.g., _Vec) and there's little reason for me to write a different proposal. Maybe you'll eventually see a paper from me if I take up some of the proposal work for CFP, or if I get around to writing a version of restrict that's based off of the Tree Borrows model. Or maybe if I turn some of my thoughts on multiple return values into a paper, though I don't actually have a proper frontend proposal for that that I like, so it's more likely to remain a reflector message.

▲uecker 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Just as a recent example. There is a case where the standard obviously is broken . With a lot of support by most of the committee and actual work by a couple of people there is a paper that aims to fix it. The only people who never constructively helped but still vote against this important repair is your block of other non-contributing people you are part of: https://github.com/c-lang-org/polls/blob/main/n3909.md

(Also a counter proposal would be constructive.)

▲uecker an hour ago | parent [-]

But I apologize, I should not be so negative. But I hope you see where the frustration comes from. The cleanup efforts are driven by a lot of volunteer work. We could use any help and instead of people just voting against such works.