Re: [Libclc-developers] Re: clc_ultostr(5)

[<bo...@me...>]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> 
> Other thing: when you said comp.lang.c shall approve functions,
> I recall that they claimed about the topicality of libclc in there...
> i think this list is fine for it.
Not quite sure if I understand you 100%, but if I do...

I followed the topicality thread and I think that we should keep project 
related stuff out of c.l.c. Discussion of code, interfaces and design is 
OK to discuss in c.l.c. That seemed to be the majority opinion in the 
group.

This list is great for many purposes, and much better than c.l.c to 
discuss things, but c.l.c must make the final decision on
- what goes into the library
- the semantics of functions
- the implementation of functions

Some may see that as a limitation, to me it is our greatest advantage. 
Progress isn't the best doing it this way, but the quality is 
unbelieveable. :-)

Bjørn