DIP 1016--ref T accepts r-values--Formal Assessment
Olivier FAURE
couteaubleu at gmail.com
Tue Jan 29 23:59:08 UTC 2019
On Monday, 28 January 2019 at 17:23:51 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> * Regarding the argument "why not make this an iterative
> process where concerns are raised and incrementally addressed?"
> We modeled the DIP process after similar processes - conference
> papers, journal papers, proposals in other languages. There is
> a proposal by one or more responsibles, perfected by a
> community review, and submitted for review. This encourages
> building a strong proposal - as strong as can be - prior to
> submission. Washing that down to a negotiation between the
> proposers and the reviewers leads to a "worst acceptable
> proposal" state of affairs in which proposers are incentivized
> to submit the least-effort proposal, reactively change it as
> issues are raised by reviewers.
Fair enough.
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list