>> This proposal should read "Google's Goals and Priorities for C++"
> I would say they are quite transparent about that...
I don't even see the word "Google" anywhere?
I don't think the intended audience of this document is hacker news, it's the C++ language committee. So the question is whether the members of the committee would recognize the authors as belonging to Google (which I assume they would).
Re:Goals and Priorities for C++
by brandmeyer on Thursday May 21, 2020 @08:12PM
(#23267233)
Except that the very next paragraph clearly shows that this isn't just a statement of their priorities and goals, it is what they want the entire committee to adopt as the priorities and goals for the future evolution of the standard.
Re:Goals and Priorities for C++
by digitalcapybara on Thursday May 21, 2020 @08:16PM
(#23267268)
"Rather, this is presented as a vehicle to advertise our needs from C++ as a high-performance systems language."
I read it as as "We understand that this isn't what everyone wants the committee to adopt, but this is what we want the committee to adopt."
Re:Goals and Priorities for C++
by softwaredoug on Thursday May 21, 2020 @08:14PM
(#23267245)
I would say not, as that’s what every standards body should say. It doesn’t speak to being dominated by one stakeholders point of view.
"This paper describes the goals and priorities which the authors believe make C++ an especially effective programming language for our use cases. That said, our experience, use cases, and needs are clearly not those of every user. We aren’t pushing to directly build consensus on these points. Rather, this is presented as a vehicle to advertise our needs from C++ as a high-performance systems language."
I would say they are quite transparent about that...