← Back to context

Comment by steveklabnik

7 years ago

I don’t think that making the cycle time longer helps; I think making it shorter helps. There’s less pressure to put something in a specific release when they happen less frequently. You can, counter-intuitively, take your time.

I know less about the exact details, but I also think that having something to play with helps; I believe that this is what’s going on with with the move towards more TSes before shipping spec text, right? Being able to try things out in nightly helps us a lot.

If your goal is to help improve C++, sure, a shorter cycle time is better. If your goal is to use the language as a communication mechanism... having it change constantly underneath you isn't helpful in my experience. And it's not necessary to release a new standard to let people try things out; you can let people play around with new features without iterating on them as formal standards.

  • “Change constantly” is too broad; there are different kinds of changes. Stability is paramount.

    • If you find it too broad then just narrow it down in your mind. You won't be left with the null set.

> There’s less pressure to put something in a specific release when they happen less frequently.

I think this phrasing contradicts your point. Do you mean "more frequently", or am I missing something?