Topic: Absence of issue #3457 in C++ Standard Library
Author: Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@google.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:07:56 -0800
Raw View
Papers (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3457.htm)
aren't issues (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-toc.html).
This was discussed at
http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/bin/view/Wg21bristol/LibraryWorkingGroup#N3457_Algorithm_std_iota_and_its,
but you may not have gotten the feedback forwarded to you.
The polls were:
Poll: Do we want to see reverse_iota in C++14?
SF WF WA SA
0 0 5 3
Poll: Do we want to encourage the author to instead specify a version
of iota with strides, for beyond C++14?
SF WF WA SA
0 6 2 0
Poll: Do we spend more time this week talking about iota_n for C++14?
SF WF WA SA
0 0 6 2
I'll see if we can just send you the raw notes.
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru> wrote:
> I see that already for a long time issue #3457 "Algorithm std::iota and its
> modifications" is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues List. In my opinion
> it is a ready to use proposal that should be adopted. I would like to know
> the reason why this issue is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues List. It
> was proposed more than a tear ago.
>
> --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
> To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
> Visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
.
Author: "J. Daniel Garcia" <josedaniel.garcia@uc3m.es>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 20:11:17 +0100
Raw View
--047d7bd7581ee6057804f0a803ad
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
And please note, that N3457 is the paper number. There is no library issue
with number #3457, yet :-)
I do not think a library issue has been opened for this.
--
J. Daniel
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@google.com>wrote:
> Papers (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3457.htm)
> aren't issues (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-toc.html).
>
> This was discussed at
>
> http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/bin/view/Wg21bristol/LibraryWorkingGroup#N3457_Algorithm_std_iota_and_its
> ,
> but you may not have gotten the feedback forwarded to you.
>
> The polls were:
>
> Poll: Do we want to see reverse_iota in C++14?
> SF WF WA SA
> 0 0 5 3
> Poll: Do we want to encourage the author to instead specify a version
> of iota with strides, for beyond C++14?
> SF WF WA SA
> 0 6 2 0
> Poll: Do we spend more time this week talking about iota_n for C++14?
> SF WF WA SA
> 0 0 6 2
>
> I'll see if we can just send you the raw notes.
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru>
> wrote:
> > I see that already for a long time issue #3457 "Algorithm std::iota and
> its
> > modifications" is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues List. In my
> opinion
> > it is a ready to use proposal that should be adopted. I would like to
> know
> > the reason why this issue is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues List.
> It
> > was proposed more than a tear ago.
> >
> > --
> >
> > ---
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
> > To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
> > Visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
>
> --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
> To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
> Visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
>
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
--047d7bd7581ee6057804f0a803ad
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra">And please note, that N3457 is =
the paper number. There is no library issue with number #3457, yet :-)</div=
><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">I do not t=
hink a library issue has been opened for this.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra">--</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=A0 J. Daniel=
</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan=
23, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mail=
to:jyasskin@google.com" target=3D"_blank">jyasskin@google.com</a>></span=
> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Papers (<a href=3D"http://www.open-std.org/j=
tc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3457.htm" target=3D"_blank">http://www.open=
-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3457.htm</a>)<br>
aren't issues (<a href=3D"http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/l=
wg-toc.html" target=3D"_blank">http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/=
lwg-toc.html</a>).<br>
<br>
This was discussed at<br>
<a href=3D"http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/bin/view/Wg21bristol/LibraryWorkingGro=
up#N3457_Algorithm_std_iota_and_its" target=3D"_blank">http://wiki.edg.com/=
twiki/bin/view/Wg21bristol/LibraryWorkingGroup#N3457_Algorithm_std_iota_and=
_its</a>,<br>
but you may not have gotten the feedback forwarded to you.<br>
<br>
The polls were:<br>
<br>
Poll: Do we want to see reverse_iota in C++14?<br>
SF WF WA SA<br>
0 0 5 3<br>
Poll: Do we want to encourage the author to instead specify a version<br>
of iota with strides, for beyond C++14?<br>
SF WF WA SA<br>
0 6 2 0<br>
Poll: Do we spend more time this week talking about iota_n for C++14?<br>
SF WF WA SA<br>
0 0 6 2<br>
<br>
I'll see if we can just send you the raw notes.<br>
<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><br>
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Vlad from Moscow <<a href=3D"mailto:vl=
ad.moscow@mail.ru">vlad.moscow@mail.ru</a>> wrote:<br>
> I see that already for a long time issue #3457 "Algorithm std::io=
ta and its<br>
> modifications" is absent =A0in C++ Standard Library Issues List. =
In my opinion<br>
> it is a ready to use proposal that should be adopted. I would like to =
know<br>
> the reason why this issue is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues Lis=
t. =A0It<br>
> was proposed more than a tear ago.<br>
><br>
> --<br>
><br>
> ---<br>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro=
ups<br>
> "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br>
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send=
an<br>
> email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals%2Bunsubscribe@isocpp.org">std=
-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br>
> To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@i=
socpp.org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br>
> Visit this group at<br>
> <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/"=
target=3D"_blank">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposal=
s/</a>.<br>
<br>
--<br>
<br>
---<br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals%2Bunsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-propo=
sals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br>
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br>
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/" target=3D"_blank">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/gro=
up/std-proposals/</a>.<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
--047d7bd7581ee6057804f0a803ad--
.
Author: Zhihao Yuan <zy@miator.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 14:46:18 -0500
Raw View
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@google.com> wrote:
> Poll: Do we spend more time this week talking about iota_n for C++14?
(The question explained the answer, man.)
Anyway.
I came up with a solution about 2 months ago:
std::iota_n(std::back_inserter(v), 10, 1);
-->
std::generate_n(back_inserter(v), 10, [n = 1]() mutable { return n++; });
With C++14 lambda, you can achieve `reverse_iota_n` by replacing
`++` with `--`, and striding by replacing `++` with ` += X`. So I consider
the iota_n families are unnecessary.
--
Zhihao Yuan, ID lichray
The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
___________________________________________________
4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
.
Author: Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 04:17:36 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_248_601896.1390565856242
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think another two months will be enough that you come up with a solution
=20
std::iota( v.egin(), v.end(), 1 );
=20
-->
std::generate( v.begin(),, v.end(), , [n =3D 1]() mutable { return n++; }=
);
=20
And please be consistent write after that a proposal to remove std::iota=20
from the Standard because it can be (as you demonstrated) substituted for=
=20
std::generate.=20
Also I can give you another productive idea to substitute std::accumulate=
=20
for std::for_each.
=20
=D1=87=D0=B5=D1=82=D0=B2=D0=B5=D1=80=D0=B3, 23 =D1=8F=D0=BD=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=
=80=D1=8F 2014 =D0=B3., 23:46:18 UTC+4 =D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=
=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C Zhihao Yuan =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=
=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyas...@google.com<java=
script:>>=20
> wrote:=20
> > Poll: Do we spend more time this week talking about iota_n for C++14?=
=20
>
> (The question explained the answer, man.)=20
>
> Anyway.=20
>
> I came up with a solution about 2 months ago:=20
>
> std::iota_n(std::back_inserter(v), 10, 1);=20
>
> -->=20
>
> std::generate_n(back_inserter(v), 10, [n =3D 1]() mutable { return n++;=
=20
> });=20
>
> With C++14 lambda, you can achieve `reverse_iota_n` by replacing=20
> `++` with `--`, and striding by replacing `++` with ` +=3D X`. So I=20
> consider=20
> the iota_n families are unnecessary.=20
>
> --=20
> Zhihao Yuan, ID lichray=20
> The best way to predict the future is to invent it.=20
> ___________________________________________________=20
> 4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/=20
>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_248_601896.1390565856242
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I think another two months will be enough that you co=
me up with a solution</div><div> </div><div>std::iota( v.egin(), v.end=
(), 1 );</div><div> </div><div> --><br><br>&=
nbsp; std::generate( v.begin(),, v.end(), , [n =3D 1]() mutable { return n+=
+; } );</div><div> </div><div>And please be consistent write afte=
r that a proposal to remove std::iota from the Standard because it can be (=
as you demonstrated) substituted for std::generate. </div><div>Also I =
can give you another productive idea to substitute std::accumulate for=
std::for_each.</div><div> <br><br>=D1=87=D0=B5=D1=82=D0=B2=D0=B5=D1=
=80=D0=B3, 23 =D1=8F=D0=BD=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=80=D1=8F 2014 =D0=B3., 23:46=
:18 UTC+4 =D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=
=BB=D1=8C Zhihao Yuan =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB:</div><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-l=
eft: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; bo=
rder-left-style: solid;">On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin &=
lt;<a onmousedown=3D"this.href=3D'javascript:';return true;" onclick=3D"thi=
s.href=3D'javascript:';return true;" href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank"=
gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"MBb7anmKH3EJ">jyas...@google.com</a>> wrote:
<br>> Poll: Do we spend more time this week talking about iota_n for C++=
14?
<br>
<br>(The question explained the answer, man.)
<br>
<br>Anyway.
<br>
<br>I came up with a solution about 2 months ago:
<br>
<br> std::iota_n(std::back_<wbr>inserter(v), 10, 1);
<br>
<br> -->
<br>
<br> std::generate_n(back_inserter(<wbr>v), 10, [n =3D 1]() mutable {=
return n++; });
<br>
<br>With C++14 lambda, you can achieve `reverse_iota_n` by replacing
<br>`++` with `--`, and striding by replacing `++` with ` +=3D X`. So=
I consider
<br>the iota_n families are unnecessary.
<br>
<br>--=20
<br>Zhihao Yuan, ID lichray
<br>The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
<br>______________________________<wbr>_____________________
<br>4BSD -- <a onmousedown=3D"this.href=3D'http://www.google.com/url?q\75ht=
tp%3A%2F%2F4bsd.biz%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNEEohiBBmXaBWMbzqB=
FWtWEgT5t9g';return true;" onclick=3D"this.href=3D'http://www.google.com/ur=
l?q\75http%3A%2F%2F4bsd.biz%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNEEohiBBmX=
aBWMbzqBFWtWEgT5t9g';return true;" href=3D"http://4bsd.biz/" target=3D"_bla=
nk">http://4bsd.biz/</a>
<br></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_248_601896.1390565856242--
.
Author: Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 04:24:33 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_525_15422242.1390566273290
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have no access to reference wiki.edg...
=20
Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
=20
If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=20
post here of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.
=20
I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores proposals of=
=20
others.
=D1=87=D0=B5=D1=82=D0=B2=D0=B5=D1=80=D0=B3, 23 =D1=8F=D0=BD=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=
=80=D1=8F 2014 =D0=B3., 23:07:56 UTC+4 =D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=
=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C Jeffrey Yasskin=20
=D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB:
> Papers (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3457.htm=
)=20
>
> aren't issues (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-toc.html).=
=20
>
> This was discussed at=20
>
> http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/bin/view/Wg21bristol/LibraryWorkingGroup#N3457_=
Algorithm_std_iota_and_its<http://www.google.com/url?q=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwiki.=
edg.com%2Ftwiki%2Fbin%2Fview%2FWg21bristol%2FLibraryWorkingGroup%23N3457_Al=
gorithm_std_iota_and_its&sa=3DD&sntz=3D1&usg=3DAFQjCNEg-MVlG8eIScVHouHvKEUX=
LNnE8Q>,=20
>
> but you may not have gotten the feedback forwarded to you.=20
>
> The polls were:=20
>
> Poll: Do we want to see reverse_iota in C++14?=20
> SF WF WA SA=20
> 0 0 5 3=20
> Poll: Do we want to encourage the author to instead specify a version=20
> of iota with strides, for beyond C++14?=20
> SF WF WA SA=20
> 0 6 2 0=20
> Poll: Do we spend more time this week talking about iota_n for C++14?=20
> SF WF WA SA=20
> 0 0 6 2=20
>
> I'll see if we can just send you the raw notes.=20
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Vlad from Moscow <vlad....@mail.ru<java=
script:>>=20
> wrote:=20
> > I see that already for a long time issue #3457 "Algorithm std::iota and=
=20
> its=20
> > modifications" is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues List. In my=20
> opinion=20
> > it is a ready to use proposal that should be adopted. I would like to=
=20
> know=20
> > the reason why this issue is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues List=
..=20
> It=20
> > was proposed more than a tear ago.=20
> >=20
> > --=20
> >=20
> > ---=20
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google=20
> Groups=20
> > "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.=20
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send=
=20
> an=20
> > email to std-proposal...@isocpp.org <javascript:>.=20
> > To post to this group, send email to std-pr...@isocpp.org <javascript:>=
..=20
>
> > Visit this group at=20
> > http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.=20
>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_525_15422242.1390566273290
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I have no access to reference wiki.edg...</div><div>&=
nbsp;</div><div>Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA =
mean.</div><div> </div><div>If the level of the discussion of the prop=
osal was the same as the post here of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very u=
nseriously.</div><div> </div><div>I am dissapointed. It seems that the=
Committee simply ignores proposals of others.</div><div><br>=D1=87=D0=B5=
=D1=82=D0=B2=D0=B5=D1=80=D0=B3, 23 =D1=8F=D0=BD=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=80=D1=8F 201=
4 =D0=B3., 23:07:56 UTC+4 =D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2=
=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C Jeffrey Yasskin =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=
=81=D0=B0=D0=BB:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0p=
x 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); =
border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;">Papers (<a onmousedown=
=3D"this.href=3D'http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fwww.open-std.or=
g%2Fjtc1%2Fsc22%2Fwg21%2Fdocs%2Fpapers%2F2012%2Fn3457.htm\46sa\75D\46sntz\0=
751\46usg\75AFQjCNH_1FwxfTorRLUckd-IrP9jfXkJWw';return true;" onclick=3D"th=
is.href=3D'http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fwww.open-std.org%2Fjt=
c1%2Fsc22%2Fwg21%2Fdocs%2Fpapers%2F2012%2Fn3457.htm\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46=
usg\75AFQjCNH_1FwxfTorRLUckd-IrP9jfXkJWw';return true;" href=3D"http://www.=
open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/n3457.htm" target=3D"_blank">h=
ttp://www.open-std.org/jtc1/<wbr>sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2012/<wbr>n3457.htm<=
/a>)
<br>aren't issues (<a onmousedown=3D"this.href=3D'http://www.google.com/url=
?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fwww.open-std.org%2Fjtc1%2Fsc22%2Fwg21%2Fdocs%2Flwg-toc.ht=
ml\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNEPBKgGKRWcuMWwXRWTqKLpg-c3RA';return =
true;" onclick=3D"this.href=3D'http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fw=
ww.open-std.org%2Fjtc1%2Fsc22%2Fwg21%2Fdocs%2Flwg-toc.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\=
0751\46usg\75AFQjCNEPBKgGKRWcuMWwXRWTqKLpg-c3RA';return true;" href=3D"http=
://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-toc.html" target=3D"_blank">htt=
p://www.open-std.org/jtc1/<wbr>sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-toc.html</a>).
<br>
<br>This was discussed at
<br><a onmousedown=3D"this.href=3D'http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F=
%2Fwiki.edg.com%2Ftwiki%2Fbin%2Fview%2FWg21bristol%2FLibraryWorkingGroup%23=
N3457_Algorithm_std_iota_and_its\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNEg-MVlG=
8eIScVHouHvKEUXLNnE8Q';return true;" onclick=3D"this.href=3D'http://www.goo=
gle.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.edg.com%2Ftwiki%2Fbin%2Fview%2FWg21bristo=
l%2FLibraryWorkingGroup%23N3457_Algorithm_std_iota_and_its\46sa\75D\46sntz\=
0751\46usg\75AFQjCNEg-MVlG8eIScVHouHvKEUXLNnE8Q';return true;" href=3D"http=
://www.google.com/url?q=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwiki.edg.com%2Ftwiki%2Fbin%2Fview%2F=
Wg21bristol%2FLibraryWorkingGroup%23N3457_Algorithm_std_iota_and_its&sa=
=3DD&sntz=3D1&usg=3DAFQjCNEg-MVlG8eIScVHouHvKEUXLNnE8Q" target=3D"_=
blank">http://wiki.edg.com/twiki/bin/<wbr>view/Wg21bristol/<wbr>LibraryWork=
ingGroup#N3457_<wbr>Algorithm_std_iota_and_its</a>,
<br>but you may not have gotten the feedback forwarded to you.
<br>
<br>The polls were:
<br>
<br>Poll: Do we want to see reverse_iota in C++14?
<br>SF WF WA SA
<br>0 0 5 3
<br>Poll: Do we want to encourage the author to instead specify a version
<br>of iota with strides, for beyond C++14?
<br>SF WF WA SA
<br>0 6 2 0
<br>Poll: Do we spend more time this week talking about iota_n for C++14?
<br>SF WF WA SA
<br>0 0 6 2
<br>
<br>I'll see if we can just send you the raw notes.
<br>
<br>On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Vlad from Moscow <<a onmousedown=
=3D"this.href=3D'javascript:';return true;" onclick=3D"this.href=3D'javascr=
ipt:';return true;" href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-m=
ailto=3D"rVK3avXHPPIJ">vlad....@mail.ru</a>> wrote:
<br>> I see that already for a long time issue #3457 "Algorithm std::iot=
a and its
<br>> modifications" is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues List=
.. In my opinion
<br>> it is a ready to use proposal that should be adopted. I would like=
to know
<br>> the reason why this issue is absent in C++ Standard Library Issues=
List. It
<br>> was proposed more than a tear ago.
<br>>
<br>> --
<br>>
<br>> ---
<br>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google=
Groups
<br>> "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
<br>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, =
send an
<br>> email to <a onmousedown=3D"this.href=3D'javascript:';return true;"=
onclick=3D"this.href=3D'javascript:';return true;" href=3D"javascript:" ta=
rget=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"rVK3avXHPPIJ">std-proposal...@<wbr=
>isocpp.org</a>.
<br>> To post to this group, send email to <a onmousedown=3D"this.href=
=3D'javascript:';return true;" onclick=3D"this.href=3D'javascript:';return =
true;" href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"rVK3=
avXHPPIJ">std-pr...@isocpp.org</a>.
<br>> Visit this group at
<br>> <a onmousedown=3D"this.href=3D'http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.o=
rg/group/std-proposals/';return true;" onclick=3D"this.href=3D'http://group=
s.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/';return true;" href=3D"http:=
//groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/" target=3D"_blank">ht=
tp://groups.google.com/a/<wbr>isocpp.org/group/std-<wbr>proposals/</a>.
<br></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_525_15422242.1390566273290--
.
Author: Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 04:40:56 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_208_32218339.1390567256641
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Friday, January 24, 2014 1:24:33 PM UTC+1, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>
> Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
>
Strong For, Weak For, Weak Against, Strong Against
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
------=_Part_208_32218339.1390567256641
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">On Friday, January 24, 2014 1:24:33 PM UTC+1, Vlad from Mo=
scow wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left=
: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><d=
iv>Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.<br></di=
v></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Strong For, Weak For, Weak Against=
, Strong Against</div><div> <br></div><div> </div></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_208_32218339.1390567256641--
.
Author: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 15:01:05 +0200
Raw View
On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru> wrote:
> I have no access to reference wiki.edg...
>
> Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
>
> If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the post h=
ere
> of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.
>
> I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores proposals o=
f
> others.
Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working furth=
er
on this proposal.
Relevant discussion bits:
Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there
are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author
to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.
Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a
broader paper is needed.
Daniel being Daniel Kr=FCgler, so contact him for further assistance.
Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probably be=
of
assistance as well.
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
.
Author: Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 14:03:31 +0100
Raw View
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Ville Voutilainen
<ville.voutilainen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
>
> Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working fur=
ther
> on this proposal.
>
> Relevant discussion bits:
>
> Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there
> are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author
> to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.
>
> Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a
> broader paper is needed.
>
> Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance.
>
> Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probably =
be of
> assistance as well.
I'd be nice to have this feedback published (for all papers) without
having to ask for it every time. ;)
--=20
Olaf
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
.
Author: Zhihao Yuan <zy@miator.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 12:08:29 -0500
Raw View
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Ville Voutilainen
> <ville.voutilainen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
LOL
> I'd be nice to have this feedback published (for all papers) without
> having to ask for it every time. ;)
I assume STL should bring you, Vald, feedback, *if* it was you who
asked him to present the paper.
Hate to say this, the most efficient way to discuss a proposal from an
individual is to have the author come to the meeting, physically.
--
Zhihao Yuan, ID lichray
The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
___________________________________________________
4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
.
Author: Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 11:31:09 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_101_827816677.1415302269138
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I would like to submit the same proposal on std::iota the second time=20
because I did not see any general exceptions from the Committee.
What should I do? Do I need to resend the same text of the proposal the=20
second time?
On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <vlad....@mail.ru <javascript:=
>>=20
> wrote:=20
> > I have no access to reference wiki.edg...=20
> >=20
> > Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.=20
> >=20
> > If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the post=
=20
> here=20
> > of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.=20
> >=20
> > I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores proposals=
=20
> of=20
> > others.=20
>
> Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.=20
>
> Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working=20
> further=20
> on this proposal.=20
>
> Relevant discussion bits:=20
>
> Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there=20
> are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author=20
> to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.=20
>
> Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a=20
> broader paper is needed.=20
>
> Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance.=
=20
>
> Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probably=
=20
> be of=20
> assistance as well.=20
>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_101_827816677.1415302269138
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I would like to submit the same proposal on std::iota=
the second time because I did not see any general exceptions from the Comm=
ittee.</div><div><br></div><div>What should I do? Do I need to resend the s=
ame text of the proposal the second time?<br><br>On Friday, January 24, 201=
4 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left=
-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: soli=
d;">On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <<a onmousedown=3D"this.h=
ref=3D'javascript:';return true;" onclick=3D"this.href=3D'javascript:';retu=
rn true;" href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"a=
2o7GAkLjP0J">vlad....@mail.ru</a>> wrote:
<br>> I have no access to reference wiki.edg...
<br>>
<br>> Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
<br>>
<br>> If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
post here
<br>> of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.
<br>>
<br>> I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores prop=
osals of
<br>> others.
<br>
<br>Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
<br>
<br>Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working f=
urther
<br>on this proposal.
<br>
<br>Relevant discussion bits:
<br>
<br>Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there
<br>are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author
<br>to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.
<br>
<br>Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a
<br>broader paper is needed.
<br>
<br>Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance=
..
<br>
<br>Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probabl=
y be of
<br>assistance as well.
<br></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-proposa=
ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_101_827816677.1415302269138--
.
Author: Michael Price - Dev <michael.b.price.dev@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 15:06:05 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_439_2072672352.1415315165957
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I can with near certainty say that if you were to do so, you'd get a paper=
=20
number and there would be a 30 second explanation that this is the same=20
exact text as a previous proposal and that nothing has significantly=20
changed. It would then be removed from the agenda. Just my best guess of=
=20
how that would play out.
Instead, I'd suggest taking Ville's advice if you want to continue working=
=20
on the idea. I'm sure such a revised paper would be received more=20
favorably than simply resubmitting one that was already rejected.
On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>
> I would like to submit the same proposal on std::iota the second time=20
> because I did not see any general exceptions from the Committee.
>
> What should I do? Do I need to resend the same text of the proposal the=
=20
> second time?
>
> On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>
>> On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <vlad....@mail.ru> wrote:=20
>> > I have no access to reference wiki.edg...=20
>> >=20
>> > Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.=20
>> >=20
>> > If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the pos=
t=20
>> here=20
>> > of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.=20
>> >=20
>> > I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores proposal=
s=20
>> of=20
>> > others.=20
>>
>> Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.=20
>>
>> Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working=20
>> further=20
>> on this proposal.=20
>>
>> Relevant discussion bits:=20
>>
>> Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there=20
>> are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author=20
>> to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.=20
>>
>> Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a=20
>> broader paper is needed.=20
>>
>> Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance.=
=20
>>
>> Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probably=
=20
>> be of=20
>> assistance as well.=20
>>
>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_439_2072672352.1415315165957
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">I can with near certainty say that if you were to do so, y=
ou'd get a paper number and there would be a 30 second explanation that thi=
s is the same exact text as a previous proposal and that nothing has signif=
icantly changed. It would then be removed from the agenda. Just=
my best guess of how that would play out.<div><br></div><div>Instead, I'd =
suggest taking Ville's advice if you want to continue working on the idea. =
I'm sure such a revised paper would be received more favorably than s=
imply resubmitting one that was already rejected.<br><br>On Thursday, Novem=
ber 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:<blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc sol=
id;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I would like to submit the sam=
e proposal on std::iota the second time because I did not see any general e=
xceptions from the Committee.</div><div><br></div><div>What should I do? Do=
I need to resend the same text of the proposal the second time?<br><br>On =
Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:</div><b=
lockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-l=
eft:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-lef=
t-style:solid">On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <<a>vlad....@m=
ail.ru</a>> wrote:
<br>> I have no access to reference wiki.edg...
<br>>
<br>> Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
<br>>
<br>> If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
post here
<br>> of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.
<br>>
<br>> I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores prop=
osals of
<br>> others.
<br>
<br>Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
<br>
<br>Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working f=
urther
<br>on this proposal.
<br>
<br>Relevant discussion bits:
<br>
<br>Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there
<br>are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author
<br>to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.
<br>
<br>Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a
<br>broader paper is needed.
<br>
<br>Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance=
..
<br>
<br>Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probabl=
y be of
<br>assistance as well.
<br></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-proposa=
ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_439_2072672352.1415315165957--
.
Author: Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 20:36:32 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_404_1522627428.1415334992904
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
What is the Ville's advice?
I would revise the paper if the were any general exceptions that deserve to=
=20
be considered but till now I do not know about them=20
=20
It is not my responsibility that somebody in the Committee will remove the=
=20
proposal from agenda.. I even do not bother about this. My task only is to=
=20
submit the proposal again and again .Let bother those who prevents=20
programmers to have needful algorithms without any explanations.:)
On Friday, November 7, 2014 2:06:05 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev wrote:
> I can with near certainty say that if you were to do so, you'd get a pape=
r=20
> number and there would be a 30 second explanation that this is the same=
=20
> exact text as a previous proposal and that nothing has significantly=20
> changed. It would then be removed from the agenda. Just my best guess o=
f=20
> how that would play out.
>
> Instead, I'd suggest taking Ville's advice if you want to continue workin=
g=20
> on the idea. I'm sure such a revised paper would be received more=20
> favorably than simply resubmitting one that was already rejected.
>
> On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>>
>> I would like to submit the same proposal on std::iota the second time=20
>> because I did not see any general exceptions from the Committee.
>>
>> What should I do? Do I need to resend the same text of the proposal the=
=20
>> second time?
>>
>> On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>>
>>> On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <vlad....@mail.ru> wrote:=20
>>> > I have no access to reference wiki.edg...=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=20
>>> post here=20
>>> > of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores=20
>>> proposals of=20
>>> > others.=20
>>>
>>> Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.=20
>>>
>>> Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working=
=20
>>> further=20
>>> on this proposal.=20
>>>
>>> Relevant discussion bits:=20
>>>
>>> Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there=20
>>> are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author=
=20
>>> to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.=20
>>>
>>> Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a=20
>>> broader paper is needed.=20
>>>
>>> Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance=
..=20
>>>
>>> Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probabl=
y=20
>>> be of=20
>>> assistance as well.=20
>>>
>>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_404_1522627428.1415334992904
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>What is the Ville's advice?</div><div><br></div=
><div>I would revise the paper if the were any general exceptions that dese=
rve to be considered but till now I do not know about them </div>=
<div> </div><div>It is not my responsibility that somebody in the Comm=
ittee will remove the proposal from agenda.. I even do not bother about thi=
s. My task only is to submit the proposal again and again .Let bother those=
who prevents programmers to have needful algorithms without any=
explanations.:)<br><br>On Friday, November 7, 2014 2:06:05 AM UTC+3, Micha=
el Price - Dev wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 2=
04); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir=3D"ltr">I =
can with near certainty say that if you were to do so, you'd get a paper nu=
mber and there would be a 30 second explanation that this is the same exact=
text as a previous proposal and that nothing has significantly changed. &n=
bsp;It would then be removed from the agenda. Just my best guess of h=
ow that would play out.<div><br></div><div>Instead, I'd suggest taking Vill=
e's advice if you want to continue working on the idea. I'm sure such=
a revised paper would be received more favorably than simply resubmitting =
one that was already rejected.<br><br>On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09=
PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(20=
4, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir=
=3D"ltr"><div>I would like to submit the same proposal on std::iota the sec=
ond time because I did not see any general exceptions from the Committee.</=
div><div><br></div><div>What should I do? Do I need to resend the same text=
of the proposal the second time?<br><br>On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:0=
5 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"=
style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: =
rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;">On 2=
4 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <<a>vlad....@mail.ru</a>> wrot=
e:
<br>> I have no access to reference wiki.edg...
<br>>
<br>> Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
<br>>
<br>> If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
post here
<br>> of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.
<br>>
<br>> I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores prop=
osals of
<br>> others.
<br>
<br>Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
<br>
<br>Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working f=
urther
<br>on this proposal.
<br>
<br>Relevant discussion bits:
<br>
<br>Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there
<br>are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author
<br>to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.
<br>
<br>Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a
<br>broader paper is needed.
<br>
<br>Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance=
..
<br>
<br>Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probabl=
y be of
<br>assistance as well.
<br></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-proposa=
ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_404_1522627428.1415334992904--
.
Author: Michael Price - Dev <michael.b.price.dev@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 21:07:57 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_591_967790094.1415336877654
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
See Ville's reply on January 24.
Being uncivil, particularly to those who are trying to help you out, is not=
=20
a very successful approach to getting others to agree with a position that=
=20
you are advocating for.
On Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:36:32 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>
> What is the Ville's advice?
>
> I would revise the paper if the were any general exceptions that deserve=
=20
> to be considered but till now I do not know about them=20
> =20
> It is not my responsibility that somebody in the Committee will remove th=
e=20
> proposal from agenda.. I even do not bother about this. My task only is t=
o=20
> submit the proposal again and again .Let bother those who prevents=20
> programmers to have needful algorithms without any explanations.:)
>
> On Friday, November 7, 2014 2:06:05 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev wrote:
>
>> I can with near certainty say that if you were to do so, you'd get a=20
>> paper number and there would be a 30 second explanation that this is the=
=20
>> same exact text as a previous proposal and that nothing has significantl=
y=20
>> changed. It would then be removed from the agenda. Just my best guess =
of=20
>> how that would play out.
>>
>> Instead, I'd suggest taking Ville's advice if you want to continue=20
>> working on the idea. I'm sure such a revised paper would be received mo=
re=20
>> favorably than simply resubmitting one that was already rejected.
>>
>> On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>>>
>>> I would like to submit the same proposal on std::iota the second time=
=20
>>> because I did not see any general exceptions from the Committee.
>>>
>>> What should I do? Do I need to resend the same text of the proposal the=
=20
>>> second time?
>>>
>>> On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <vlad....@mail.ru> wrote:=
=20
>>>> > I have no access to reference wiki.edg...=20
>>>> >=20
>>>> > Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.=20
>>>> >=20
>>>> > If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
=20
>>>> post here=20
>>>> > of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.=20
>>>> >=20
>>>> > I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores=20
>>>> proposals of=20
>>>> > others.=20
>>>>
>>>> Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.=20
>>>>
>>>> Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working=
=20
>>>> further=20
>>>> on this proposal.=20
>>>>
>>>> Relevant discussion bits:=20
>>>>
>>>> Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there=
=20
>>>> are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author=
=20
>>>> to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.=20
>>>>
>>>> Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a=
=20
>>>> broader paper is needed.=20
>>>>
>>>> Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistanc=
e.=20
>>>>
>>>> Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can=20
>>>> probably be of=20
>>>> assistance as well.=20
>>>>
>>>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_591_967790094.1415336877654
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">See Ville's reply on January 24.<div><br></div><div>Being =
uncivil, particularly to those who are trying to help you out, is not a ver=
y successful approach to getting others to agree with a position that you a=
re advocating for.<br></div><div><br>On Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:36:32=
PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: =
1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>What is the Ville's advice?</div><div><br=
></div><div>I would revise the paper if the were any general exceptions tha=
t deserve to be considered but till now I do not know about them =
</div><div> </div><div>It is not my responsibility that somebody in th=
e Committee will remove the proposal from agenda.. I even do not bother abo=
ut this. My task only is to submit the proposal again and again .Let bother=
those who prevents programmers to have needful algorithms witho=
ut any explanations.:)<br><br>On Friday, November 7, 2014 2:06:05 AM UTC+3,=
Michael Price - Dev wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D=
"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,20=
4);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div dir=3D"ltr">I can wi=
th near certainty say that if you were to do so, you'd get a paper number a=
nd there would be a 30 second explanation that this is the same exact text =
as a previous proposal and that nothing has significantly changed. It=
would then be removed from the agenda. Just my best guess of how tha=
t would play out.<div><br></div><div>Instead, I'd suggest taking Ville's ad=
vice if you want to continue working on the idea. I'm sure such a rev=
ised paper would be received more favorably than simply resubmitting one th=
at was already rejected.<br><br>On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UT=
C-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"marg=
in:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);bo=
rder-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I would =
like to submit the same proposal on std::iota the second time because I did=
not see any general exceptions from the Committee.</div><div><br></div><di=
v>What should I do? Do I need to resend the same text of the proposal the s=
econd time?<br><br>On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Vout=
ilainen wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-width:1px;border-left-style:solid">On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Mo=
scow <<a>vlad....@mail.ru</a>> wrote:
<br>> I have no access to reference wiki.edg...
<br>>
<br>> Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
<br>>
<br>> If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
post here
<br>> of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.
<br>>
<br>> I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores prop=
osals of
<br>> others.
<br>
<br>Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
<br>
<br>Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working f=
urther
<br>on this proposal.
<br>
<br>Relevant discussion bits:
<br>
<br>Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there
<br>are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author
<br>to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.
<br>
<br>Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a
<br>broader paper is needed.
<br>
<br>Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance=
..
<br>
<br>Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probabl=
y be of
<br>assistance as well.
<br></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></blockq=
uote></div></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-proposa=
ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_591_967790094.1415336877654--
.
Author: Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 00:41:32 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_373_913087485.1415349692826
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am sorry but there is nothing to comment relative to "genius solution"=20
of Zhihao. Moreover the original algorithm std::iota can be realized by=
=20
means of std::generate. So my question to you where were you when this=20
algorithm was being adopted?! Why you did not refer to Zhihao solution?
If it is interesting to Ville then I can give points to Ville that for=20
example there is a more genius solution for example to substitute algorithm=
=20
std::generate for std::for_each. Or even the more ginius solution to=20
substitute any algorithm with an ordinary for loop. I am waiting with=20
impatience when Ville will make such a proposal.
It is not me who needs a help (I simply do not see any help in this case).=
=20
It is members of the Committee that need a help. And I provided such a=20
help.=20
One more you forget that it is not me who needs the modifications of the=20
algorithm. It is programmers who will get profit of adopting of these=20
algorithms.
As for Zhihao then nobody prevents him to use std::generate_n where he=20
could use std::iota_n. It is well-known that the same task can be done=20
with several approaches. For example you can use either std::adjacent_find=
=20
or std::is_sorted for the same task. But I prefer to use the feature that=
=20
is more expressive and clear for a given task.
On Friday, November 7, 2014 8:07:57 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev wrote:
> See Ville's reply on January 24.
>
> Being uncivil, particularly to those who are trying to help you out, is=
=20
> not a very successful approach to getting others to agree with a position=
=20
> that you are advocating for.
>
> On Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:36:32 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>>
>> What is the Ville's advice?
>>
>> I would revise the paper if the were any general exceptions that deserve=
=20
>> to be considered but till now I do not know about them=20
>> =20
>> It is not my responsibility that somebody in the Committee will remove=
=20
>> the proposal from agenda.. I even do not bother about this. My task only=
is=20
>> to submit the proposal again and again .Let bother those who prevents=20
>> programmers to have needful algorithms without any explanations.:)
>>
>> On Friday, November 7, 2014 2:06:05 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev wrote:
>>
>>> I can with near certainty say that if you were to do so, you'd get a=20
>>> paper number and there would be a 30 second explanation that this is th=
e=20
>>> same exact text as a previous proposal and that nothing has significant=
ly=20
>>> changed. It would then be removed from the agenda. Just my best guess=
of=20
>>> how that would play out.
>>>
>>> Instead, I'd suggest taking Ville's advice if you want to continue=20
>>> working on the idea. I'm sure such a revised paper would be received m=
ore=20
>>> favorably than simply resubmitting one that was already rejected.
>>>
>>> On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I would like to submit the same proposal on std::iota the second time=
=20
>>>> because I did not see any general exceptions from the Committee.
>>>>
>>>> What should I do? Do I need to resend the same text of the proposal th=
e=20
>>>> second time?
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <vlad....@mail.ru> wrote:=
=20
>>>>> > I have no access to reference wiki.edg...=20
>>>>> >=20
>>>>> > Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.=20
>>>>> >=20
>>>>> > If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
=20
>>>>> post here=20
>>>>> > of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.=20
>>>>> >=20
>>>>> > I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores=20
>>>>> proposals of=20
>>>>> > others.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working=
=20
>>>>> further=20
>>>>> on this proposal.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Relevant discussion bits:=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there=
=20
>>>>> are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author=
=20
>>>>> to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a=
=20
>>>>> broader paper is needed.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistan=
ce.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can=20
>>>>> probably be of=20
>>>>> assistance as well.=20
>>>>>
>>>>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_373_913087485.1415349692826
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I am sorry but there is nothing to comment relative t=
o "genius solution" of Zhihao. Moreover the original algorithm =
std::iota can be realized by means of std::generate. So my question to you =
where were you when this algorithm was being adopted?! Why you did not refe=
r to Zhihao solution?</div><div><br></div><div>If it is interesting to Vill=
e then I can give points to Ville that for example there is a more genius s=
olution for example to substitute algorithm std::generate for std::for_each=
.. Or even the more ginius solution to substitute any algorithm with an ordi=
nary for loop. I am waiting with impatience when Ville will make such a pro=
posal.</div><div><br></div><div>It is not me who needs a help (I simply do =
not see any help in this case). It is members of the Committee t=
hat need a help. And I provided such a help. </div><div><br></div><div>One =
more you forget that it is not me who needs the modifications of the algori=
thm. It is programmers who will get profit of adopting of these algorithms.=
</div><div><br></div><div>As for Zhihao then nobody prevents him to use std=
::generate_n where he could use std::iota_n. It is well-known that the same=
task can be done with several approaches. For example you can use ei=
ther std::adjacent_find or std::is_sorted for the same task. But I prefer t=
o use the feature that is more expressive and clear for a given task.</div>=
<div><br>On Friday, November 7, 2014 8:07:57 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev =
wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px =
0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-lef=
t-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir=3D"ltr">See Ville's reply=
on January 24.<div><br></div><div>Being uncivil, particularly to those who=
are trying to help you out, is not a very successful approach to getting o=
thers to agree with a position that you are advocating for.<br></div><div><=
br>On Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:36:32 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; paddi=
ng-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px=
; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>What is the Ville'=
s advice?</div><div><br></div><div>I would revise the paper if the were any=
general exceptions that deserve to be considered but till now I do no=
t know about them </div><div> </div><div>It is not my responsibil=
ity that somebody in the Committee will remove the proposal from agenda.. I=
even do not bother about this. My task only is to submit the proposal agai=
n and again .Let bother those who prevents programmers to have n=
eedful algorithms without any explanations.:)<br><br>On Friday, November 7,=
2014 2:06:05 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev wrote:</div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; bor=
der-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-sty=
le: solid;"><div dir=3D"ltr">I can with near certainty say that if you were=
to do so, you'd get a paper number and there would be a 30 second explanat=
ion that this is the same exact text as a previous proposal and that nothin=
g has significantly changed. It would then be removed from the agenda=
.. Just my best guess of how that would play out.<div><br></div><div>I=
nstead, I'd suggest taking Ville's advice if you want to continue working o=
n the idea. I'm sure such a revised paper would be received more favo=
rably than simply resubmitting one that was already rejected.<br><br>On Thu=
rsday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:<blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1=
ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-l=
eft-style: solid;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I would like to submit the same pr=
oposal on std::iota the second time because I did not see any general excep=
tions from the Committee.</div><div><br></div><div>What should I do? Do I n=
eed to resend the same text of the proposal the second time?<br><br>On Frid=
ay, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:</div><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-lef=
t: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; bord=
er-left-style: solid;">On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <<a>vl=
ad....@mail.ru</a>> wrote:
<br>> I have no access to reference wiki.edg...
<br>>
<br>> Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
<br>>
<br>> If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
post here
<br>> of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.
<br>>
<br>> I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores prop=
osals of
<br>> others.
<br>
<br>Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
<br>
<br>Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working f=
urther
<br>on this proposal.
<br>
<br>Relevant discussion bits:
<br>
<br>Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there
<br>are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author
<br>to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.
<br>
<br>Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a
<br>broader paper is needed.
<br>
<br>Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance=
..
<br>
<br>Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probabl=
y be of
<br>assistance as well.
<br></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></blockq=
uote></div></div></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-proposa=
ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_373_913087485.1415349692826--
.
Author: Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 01:53:55 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_426_1589039288.1415354035903
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Alsp Michael take into account that in general case std::generate_n is not=
=20
equivalent to std::iota_n. I proposed that std::iota_n as a numeric=20
algorithm would return the last incremented value. So it can be used for=
=20
example to initialize a two dimensional array
std::accumulate( std::begin( a ), std::end( a ), init_value,=20
[]( T s, T ( &x )[M] )=20
{=20
return ( iota( std::begin( x ), std::end( x ), s ) );=20
} );=20
or it can be used as an argument of a function.
On Friday, November 7, 2014 8:07:57 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev wrote:
> See Ville's reply on January 24.
>
> Being uncivil, particularly to those who are trying to help you out, is=
=20
> not a very successful approach to getting others to agree with a position=
=20
> that you are advocating for.
>
> On Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:36:32 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>>
>> What is the Ville's advice?
>>
>> I would revise the paper if the were any general exceptions that deserve=
=20
>> to be considered but till now I do not know about them=20
>> =20
>> It is not my responsibility that somebody in the Committee will remove=
=20
>> the proposal from agenda.. I even do not bother about this. My task only=
is=20
>> to submit the proposal again and again .Let bother those who prevents=20
>> programmers to have needful algorithms without any explanations.:)
>>
>> On Friday, November 7, 2014 2:06:05 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev wrote:
>>
>>> I can with near certainty say that if you were to do so, you'd get a=20
>>> paper number and there would be a 30 second explanation that this is th=
e=20
>>> same exact text as a previous proposal and that nothing has significant=
ly=20
>>> changed. It would then be removed from the agenda. Just my best guess=
of=20
>>> how that would play out.
>>>
>>> Instead, I'd suggest taking Ville's advice if you want to continue=20
>>> working on the idea. I'm sure such a revised paper would be received m=
ore=20
>>> favorably than simply resubmitting one that was already rejected.
>>>
>>> On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I would like to submit the same proposal on std::iota the second time=
=20
>>>> because I did not see any general exceptions from the Committee.
>>>>
>>>> What should I do? Do I need to resend the same text of the proposal th=
e=20
>>>> second time?
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad from Moscow <vlad....@mail.ru> wrote:=
=20
>>>>> > I have no access to reference wiki.edg...=20
>>>>> >=20
>>>>> > Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.=20
>>>>> >=20
>>>>> > If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
=20
>>>>> post here=20
>>>>> > of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.=20
>>>>> >=20
>>>>> > I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores=20
>>>>> proposals of=20
>>>>> > others.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working=
=20
>>>>> further=20
>>>>> on this proposal.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Relevant discussion bits:=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there=
=20
>>>>> are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author=
=20
>>>>> to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a=
=20
>>>>> broader paper is needed.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistan=
ce.=20
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can=20
>>>>> probably be of=20
>>>>> assistance as well.=20
>>>>>
>>>>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_426_1589039288.1415354035903
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Alsp Michael take into account that in general case s=
td::generate_n is not equivalent to std::iota_n. I proposed that std::iota_=
n as a numeric algorithm would return the last incremented value. So =
it can be used for example to initialize a two dimensional array</div><div>=
<br></div><div> std::accumulate( std::begin( a ), std::end( a ), init_=
value, <br> []( T s, T =
( &x )[M] ) <br> &nbs=
p; { <br> return ( iota( std::begin( x ), std::end=
( x ), s ) ); <br> =
} ); </div><div><br></div><div>or it can be used as an a=
rgument of a function.<br><br>On Friday, November 7, 2014 8:07:57 AM UTC+3,=
Michael Price - Dev wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D=
"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, =
204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir=3D"l=
tr">See Ville's reply on January 24.<div><br></div><div>Being uncivil, part=
icularly to those who are trying to help you out, is not a very successful =
approach to getting others to agree with a position that you are advocating=
for.<br></div><div><br>On Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:36:32 PM UTC-6, Vl=
ad from Moscow wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px=
0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); b=
order-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Wha=
t is the Ville's advice?</div><div><br></div><div>I would revise the =
paper if the were any general exceptions that deserve to be considered=
but till now I do not know about them </div><div> </div><div>It =
is not my responsibility that somebody in the Committee will remove the pro=
posal from agenda.. I even do not bother about this. My task only is to sub=
mit the proposal again and again .Let bother those who prevents programmers=
to have needful algorithms without any explanations.:)<br><br>O=
n Friday, November 7, 2014 2:06:05 AM UTC+3, Michael Price - Dev wrote:</di=
v><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; pad=
ding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1=
px; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir=3D"ltr">I can with near certainty s=
ay that if you were to do so, you'd get a paper number and there would be a=
30 second explanation that this is the same exact text as a previous propo=
sal and that nothing has significantly changed. It would then be remo=
ved from the agenda. Just my best guess of how that would play out.<d=
iv><br></div><div>Instead, I'd suggest taking Ville's advice if you want to=
continue working on the idea. I'm sure such a revised paper would be=
received more favorably than simply resubmitting one that was already reje=
cted.<br><br>On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:31:09 PM UTC-6, Vlad from Mosc=
ow wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8=
ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-w=
idth: 1px; border-left-style: solid;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I would like to=
submit the same proposal on std::iota the second time because I did not se=
e any general exceptions from the Committee.</div><div><br></div><div>What =
should I do? Do I need to resend the same text of the proposal the second t=
ime?<br><br>On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:01:05 PM UTC+4, Ville Voutilainen=
wrote:</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px=
0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-le=
ft-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;">On 24 January 2014 14:24, Vlad fr=
om Moscow <<a>vlad....@mail.ru</a>> wrote:
<br>> I have no access to reference wiki.edg...
<br>>
<br>> Also could you say what these abbreviations SF, WF, WA, SA mean.
<br>>
<br>> If the level of the discussion of the proposal was the same as the=
post here
<br>> of Zhihao Yuan then it looks very unseriously.
<br>>
<br>> I am dissapointed. It seems that the Committee simply ignores prop=
osals of
<br>> others.
<br>
<br>Feel free to explain why Zhihao's solution is not suitable.
<br>
<br>Also, the committee didn't ignore anything, the LWG supported working f=
urther
<br>on this proposal.
<br>
<br>Relevant discussion bits:
<br>
<br>Daniel: Likes some parts of it, like iota_n in principle. But, there
<br>are lots of controversial issues here. Would like to encourage author
<br>to proceed work on this. But not ready for C++14.
<br>
<br>Stefanus: Given there are so many other issues in this area, seems a
<br>broader paper is needed.
<br>
<br>Daniel being Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler, so contact him for further assistance=
..
<br>
<br>Stephan T. Lavavej of Microsoft presented your paper, so he can probabl=
y be of
<br>assistance as well.
<br></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></blockq=
uote></div></div></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-proposa=
ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_426_1589039288.1415354035903--
.
Author: Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer@gmx.net>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2014 13:50:13 +0100
Raw View
Hi Vlad!
There is a long-term maintenance cost that comes with every new feature add=
ed
to C++ (language or library), so it seems legitimate to make adding a featu=
re
a judgement call involving issues other than "is it well-specified".
Personally, as a standards person, I'd like to have modular building blocks
in the standard library that combine well together, but unless a compelling
real-world need is shown to add a given feature, I see no need to have a
complete matrix just for the sake of completeness. With "complete matrix",
I mean "generate, generate_n, iota, iota_n" and possibly other algorithms
I forgot about.
On 11/07/2014 09:41 AM, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
> I am sorry but there is nothing to comment relative to "genius solution" =
of Zhihao.
Great, so you accept Zhihao's solution works.
> Moreover the original algorithm std::iota can be realized by means of s=
td::generate. So my question to you where were you when this algorithm was =
being adopted?! Why you did not refer to Zhihao solution?
> If it is interesting to Ville then I can give points to Ville that for ex=
ample there is a more genius solution for example to substitute algorithm s=
td::generate for std::for_each. Or even the more ginius solution to substit=
ute any algorithm with an ordinary for loop. I am waiting with impatience w=
hen Ville will make such a proposal.
There is a much higher bar in removing something from the standard compared=
to
rejecting a new feature at the onset.
> It is not me who needs a help (I simply do not see any help in this case)=
.. It is members of the Committee that need a help. And I provided such a h=
elp.
> One more you forget that it is not me who needs the modifications of the =
algorithm. It is programmers who will get profit of adopting of these algor=
ithms.
I'm sure the committee will reconsider if an updated paper of yours shows a=
substantial
number of specific situations in existing C++ software (e.g. in open-source=
software)
where std::iota_n (as opposed to Zhihao's solution) vastly simplifies the c=
ode.
Until then, it's your opinion vs. the opinion of other people.
Also, people selling "stuff" (compilers, libraries, tools) that implements =
the C++
standard do have a business incentive to listen to their customers, so if t=
here is
indeed a widespread need for a given feature, I'd expect more people on the=
committee
to be in favor.
> As for Zhihao then nobody prevents him to use std::generate_n where he co=
uld use std::iota_n. It is well-known that the same task can be done with =
several approaches. For example you can use either std::adjacent_find or st=
d::is_sorted for the same task. But I prefer to use the feature that is mor=
e expressive and clear for a given task.
You're answering the wrong question. It's not Zhihao personally, it's whet=
her the
benefits in adding std::iota_n outweigh the costs, in general. The committ=
ee
members simply seem to be unconvinced. If you want to make progress on thi=
s issue,
present new arguments that decrease the cost or increase the perceived bene=
fits.
Jens
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
.
Author: Vlad from Moscow <vlad.moscow@mail.ru>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 21:07:43 -0800 (PST)
Raw View
------=_Part_635_1592749972.1415596063709
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BD=D0=B5=D0=B4=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=BD=D0=B8=D0=BA, 10 =D0=
=BD=D0=BE=D1=8F=D0=B1=D1=80=D1=8F 2014 =D0=B3., 5:23:45 UTC+3 =D0=BF=D0=BE=
=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C Jens Maurer=20
=D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB:
>
> Hi Vlad!=20
>
> There is a long-term maintenance cost that comes with every new feature=
=20
> added=20
> to C++ (language or library), so it seems legitimate to make adding a=20
> feature=20
> a judgement call involving issues other than "is it well-specified".=20
>
> Personally, as a standards person, I'd like to have modular building=20
> blocks=20
> in the standard library that combine well together, but unless a=20
> compelling=20
> real-world need is shown to add a given feature, I see no need to have a=
=20
> complete matrix just for the sake of completeness. With "complete=20
> matrix",=20
> I mean "generate, generate_n, iota, iota_n" and possibly other algorithm=
s=20
> I forgot about.=20
>
>
> First of all you are contradicting yourself or the realty does not=20
coincide with what you are saying. If to follow your logic then=20
std::iota had not to be adopted because it can be substituted for=20
std::generate. Moreover it is much better do not adopt some feature than=20
adopt a defective or partial proposal, because it creates only new=20
problems. As a programmer you may use a limited set of C++ features but the=
=20
C++ Standard shall indeed provide a "complete matrix". Otherwise it is a=20
defective standard.
=20
=20
> On 11/07/2014 09:41 AM, Vlad from Moscow wrote:=20
> > I am sorry but there is nothing to comment relative to "genius solution=
"=20
> of Zhihao.=20
>
> Great, so you accept Zhihao's solution works.=20
>
> Of course solution of Zhihao works. Moreover as I already pointed out=20
instead of for example std::generate algorithm std::for_each works the same=
=20
way. Are you suprised?
=20
> > Moreover the original algorithm std::iota can be realized by means of=
=20
> std::generate. So my question to you where were you when this algorithm w=
as=20
> being adopted?! Why you did not refer to Zhihao solution?=20
>
> > If it is interesting to Ville then I can give points to Ville that for=
=20
> example there is a more genius solution for example to substitute algorit=
hm=20
> std::generate for std::for_each. Or even the more ginius solution to=20
> substitute any algorithm with an ordinary for loop. I am waiting with=20
> impatience when Ville will make such a proposal.=20
>
> There is a much higher bar in removing something from the standard=20
> compared to=20
> rejecting a new feature at the onset.=20
>
> > It is not me who needs a help (I simply do not see any help in this=20
> case). It is members of the Committee that need a help. And I provided=
=20
> such a help.=20
>
> > One more you forget that it is not me who needs the modifications of th=
e=20
> algorithm. It is programmers who will get profit of adopting of these=20
> algorithms.=20
>
> I'm sure the committee will reconsider if an updated paper of yours shows=
=20
> a substantial=20
> number of specific situations in existing C++ software (e.g. in=20
> open-source software)=20
> where std::iota_n (as opposed to Zhihao's solution) vastly simplifies the=
=20
> code.=20
> Until then, it's your opinion vs. the opinion of other people.=20
>
> Also, people selling "stuff" (compilers, libraries, tools) that implement=
s=20
> the C++=20
> standard do have a business incentive to listen to their customers, so if=
=20
> there is=20
> indeed a widespread need for a given feature, I'd expect more people on=
=20
> the committee=20
> to be in favor.=20
>
> There is nothing to update in the proposal because there were no general=
=20
exceptions. I have an opinion that it seems that the proposal was not even=
=20
read by members of the Committee except its title.
=20
> > As for Zhihao then nobody prevents him to use std::generate_n where he=
=20
> could use std::iota_n. It is well-known that the same task can be done wi=
th=20
> several approaches. For example you can use either std::adjacent_find or=
=20
> std::is_sorted for the same task. But I prefer to use the feature that is=
=20
> more expressive and clear for a given task.=20
>
> You're answering the wrong question. It's not Zhihao personally, it's=20
> whether the=20
> benefits in adding std::iota_n outweigh the costs, in general. The=20
> committee=20
> members simply seem to be unconvinced. If you want to make progress on=
=20
> this issue,=20
> present new arguments that decrease the cost or increase the perceived=20
> benefits.=20
>
> If you would read the proposal you would know that apart from std:iota_n=
=20
there are many other concepts in the proposal. For example one=20
important concepts is that std::iota as a numeric algorithm should return=
=20
the value that is calculated inside it.
=20
> Jens=20
>
--=20
---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/.
------=_Part_635_1592749972.1415596063709
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><br>=D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BD=D0=B5=D0=B4=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C=
=D0=BD=D0=B8=D0=BA, 10 =D0=BD=D0=BE=D1=8F=D0=B1=D1=80=D1=8F 2014 =D0=
=B3., 5:23:45 UTC+3 =D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=
=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C Jens Maurer =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB:<=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; paddin=
g-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px;=
border-left-style: solid;">Hi Vlad!
<br>
<br>There is a long-term maintenance cost that comes with every new feature=
added
<br>to C++ (language or library), so it seems legitimate to make adding a f=
eature
<br>a judgement call involving issues other than "is it well-specified".
<br>
<br>Personally, as a standards person, I'd like to have modular building bl=
ocks
<br>in the standard library that combine well together, but unless a compel=
ling
<br>real-world need is shown to add a given feature, I see no need to have =
a
<br>complete matrix just for the sake of completeness. With "complete=
matrix",
<br>I mean "generate, generate_n, iota, iota_n" and possibly other al=
gorithms
<br>I forgot about.
<br>
<br>
<br></blockquote><div>First of all you are contradicting yourself or t=
he realty does not coincide with what you are saying. If to follow your log=
ic then std::iota had not to be adopted because it can be substituted =
for std::generate. Moreover it is much better do not adopt some feature tha=
n adopt a defective or partial proposal, because it creates only new proble=
ms. As a programmer you may use a limited set of C++ features but the C++ S=
tandard shall indeed provide a "complete matrix". Otherwise it is a defecti=
ve standard.</div><div> </div><div> </div><blockquote class=3D"gm=
ail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-le=
ft-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: so=
lid;">On 11/07/2014 09:41 AM, Vlad from Moscow wrote:
<br>> I am sorry but there is nothing to comment relative to "genius sol=
ution" of Zhihao.
<br>
<br>Great, so you accept Zhihao's solution works.
<br>
<br></blockquote><div>Of course solution of Zhihao works. Moreov=
er as I already pointed out instead of for example std::generate algorithm =
std::for_each works the same way. Are you suprised?</div><div> </div><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; paddin=
g-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px;=
border-left-style: solid;">> Moreover the original algorithm std=
::iota can be realized by means of std::generate. So my question to you whe=
re were you when this algorithm was being adopted?! Why you did not refer t=
o Zhihao solution?
<br>
<br>> If it is interesting to Ville then I can give points to Ville that=
for example there is a more genius solution for example to substitute algo=
rithm std::generate for std::for_each. Or even the more ginius solution to =
substitute any algorithm with an ordinary for loop. I am waiting with impat=
ience when Ville will make such a proposal.
<br>
<br>There is a much higher bar in removing something from the standard comp=
ared to
<br>rejecting a new feature at the onset.
<br>
<br>> It is not me who needs a help (I simply do not see any help in thi=
s case). It is members of the Committee that need a help. And I provi=
ded such a help.
<br>
<br>> One more you forget that it is not me who needs the modifications =
of the algorithm. It is programmers who will get profit of adopting of thes=
e algorithms.
<br>
<br>I'm sure the committee will reconsider if an updated paper of yours sho=
ws a substantial
<br>number of specific situations in existing C++ software (e.g. in open-so=
urce software)
<br>where std::iota_n (as opposed to Zhihao's solution) vastly simplifies t=
he code.
<br>Until then, it's your opinion vs. the opinion of other people.
<br>
<br>Also, people selling "stuff" (compilers, libraries, tools) that impleme=
nts the C++
<br>standard do have a business incentive to listen to their customers, so =
if there is
<br>indeed a widespread need for a given feature, I'd expect more people on=
the committee
<br>to be in favor.
<br>
<br></blockquote><div>There is nothing to update in the proposal becau=
se there were no general exceptions. I have an opinion that it seems t=
hat the proposal was not even read by members of the Committee except its t=
itle.</div><div> </div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(20=
4, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;">> As fo=
r Zhihao then nobody prevents him to use std::generate_n where he could use=
std::iota_n. It is well-known that the same task can be done with se=
veral approaches. For example you can use either std::adjacent_find or std:=
:is_sorted for the same task. But I prefer to use the feature that is more =
expressive and clear for a given task.
<br>
<br>You're answering the wrong question. It's not Zhihao personally, =
it's whether the
<br>benefits in adding std::iota_n outweigh the costs, in general. Th=
e committee
<br>members simply seem to be unconvinced. If you want to make progre=
ss on this issue,
<br>present new arguments that decrease the cost or increase the perceived =
benefits.
<br>
<br></blockquote><div>If you would read the proposal you would know that ap=
art from std:iota_n there are many other concepts in the proposal. For exam=
ple one important concepts is that std::iota as a numeric algorithm&nb=
sp;should return the value that is calculated inside it.</div><div>&nb=
sp;</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8=
ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-w=
idth: 1px; border-left-style: solid;">Jens
<br></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org">std-proposa=
ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<=
/a>.<br />
------=_Part_635_1592749972.1415596063709--
.