3 ms·

I wouldn't mind one major thing from C++: A standard.

• dgellow 7y ago
  I’m not sure what you mean: https://isocpp.org/std/the-standard https://isocpp.org/std/the-standard
  • pjmlp 7y ago
    I think the idea is having either ECMA or ISO Go.
    • dgellow 7y ago
      I see, I misread the comment I was responding to. For some reason I got the opposite: "C++ is missing a standard", instead of "Go is missing a standard". Makes sense then.
• rob74 7y ago
  If you're talking about Go, they have an official specification (https://golang.org/ref/spec https://golang.org/ref/spec), which is probably what you mean when you write "standard", and the two official implementations (the Go compiler and the GCC-Go compiler) are based on this spec. Which is more than other up-and-coming languages (which I won't name right now) have to offer ;)
  • mhd 7y ago
    ISO/ANSI would be my preference. That's still not the best model of language governance, but at least it's not down to one company. Also a decent sign of stability.
    • jhoechtl 7y ago
      So you like to pay for specs?
      • pansa2 7y ago
        Better than not having a standard at all...
      • mhd 7y ago
        No, and I don't like paying for membership and voting rights, either. Never mind the pervasive corporate sponsorship of most members on working groups, regulatory capture etc. But I think it's still better than ad hoc "RTFC" standards or BFDLs.