From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4744 invoked by alias); 19 Nov 2004 12:56:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 4658 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2004 12:56:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 Nov 2004 12:56:51 -0000 Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34) id AA28464; Fri, 19 Nov 04 08:01:15 EST Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:31:00 -0000 From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Message-Id: <10411191301.AA28464@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> To: zlaski@apple.com Subject: Re: Is ObjC++ still in time for 4.0? Cc: discuss-gnustep@gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00678.txt.bz2 Since Geoff has objected to every design proposal I made, then naturally I was (and am) expecting a constructive alternative. It would be nice if such a thing could be done, but I don't see it as a requirement. It is, after all, your project and what you are essentially doing is asking for him to do the design for you. It's true that if somebody doesn't like a design proposal they should be able to articulate what exactly it is they don't like about it. I don't believe Geoff has done that completely, which is a legitimate complaint, but saying "if you don't like my proposal, make your own" isn't fair: it's not his project. On the other hand, I perfectly well understand the difficulty in articulating what one doesn't like about a proposal. I've been there many times: when you're very close to a project, you often get a "gut feeling" that a patch isn't the right way to do something, but find it very hard to say exactly why you think that and it can often take a lot of time to figure it out.