4 ms·

Given both are open source, neither of them is going to be able to leapfrog the other for long, at least in terms of core C/C++ language features, without the o

Given both are open source, neither of them is going to be able to leapfrog the other for long, at least in terms of core C/C++ language features, without the other copying and implementing something similar. Both have sufficient developers to keep up with the pace of development. What's more interesting, at least to me, is what impact this competition is having on the wider ecosystem. Is it leading to more features and better compilation than would be the case if there was just one compiler toolchain?

inetknght 7y ago
> Is it leading to more features and better compilation than would be the case if there was just one compiler toolchain? I would argue that the pace of C++ compiler development has significantly increased since clang was introduced. I would surmise that elimination of GCC or Clang -- in the way that Chrome has resulted in the elimination of more than one competing browser -- would be detrimental to C++ as a whole. And therefore, I would say: yes, it's leading to more features and better compilation that if it was just one compiler toolchain.
- favorited 7y ago
  Though obviously not because of Clang, the pace of C++ itself significantly increased since Clang was introduced.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    However, because Clang, we have finally IDEs caughting up with Energize C++ and VA for C++ v4 ideas, a couple of decades after they shown what would be possible with C++ when one isn't constrained to UNIX mentality of development.
    - inetknght 7y ago
      What do you mean?
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        I mean this, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQQTScuApWk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQQTScuApWk http://dreamsongs.com/Files/Energize.pdf http://dreamsongs.com/Files/Energize.pdf http://www.edm2.com/index.php/VisualAge_C%2B%2B_4.0_Review http://www.edm2.com/index.php/VisualAge_C%2B%2B_4.0_Review Basically Smalltalk like development experience, just for C++. Too advanced for early 90's computers (it demanded very high end hardware).
jhasse 7y ago
Clang can't copy from GCC due to the different licenses. GCC can't copy from Clang due to the FSF requiring a copyright assignment.
- romaniitedomum 7y ago
  Not literal copying, no, since the two codebases differ substantially, but they can look at the code for what the other has done to see how they did it and they can re-implement it without fear of patent infringement claims.
- cycloptic 7y ago
  Neither of those are significant -- both can be forked if it becomes necessary. GCC has a long history of forks, and half the reason clang is becoming popular is because the downstream vendors didn't like GPL and wanted to make proprietary forks.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    And GCC only became popular because UNIX vendors, starting with Sun, decided to sell the UNIX SDK separately from the base OS.

inetknght 7y ago

> Is it leading to more features and better compilation than would be the case if there was just one compiler toolchain? I would argue that the pace of C++ compiler development has significantly increased since clang was introduced. I would surmise that elimination of GCC or Clang -- in the way that Chrome has resulted in the elimination of more than one competing browser -- would be detrimental to C++ as a whole. And therefore, I would say: yes, it's leading to more features and better compilation that if it was just one compiler toolchain.

favorited 7y ago
Though obviously not because of Clang, the pace of C++ itself significantly increased since Clang was introduced.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  However, because Clang, we have finally IDEs caughting up with Energize C++ and VA for C++ v4 ideas, a couple of decades after they shown what would be possible with C++ when one isn't constrained to UNIX mentality of development.
  - inetknght 7y ago
    What do you mean?
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      I mean this, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQQTScuApWk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQQTScuApWk http://dreamsongs.com/Files/Energize.pdf http://dreamsongs.com/Files/Energize.pdf http://www.edm2.com/index.php/VisualAge_C%2B%2B_4.0_Review http://www.edm2.com/index.php/VisualAge_C%2B%2B_4.0_Review Basically Smalltalk like development experience, just for C++. Too advanced for early 90's computers (it demanded very high end hardware).

jhasse 7y ago

Clang can't copy from GCC due to the different licenses. GCC can't copy from Clang due to the FSF requiring a copyright assignment.

romaniitedomum 7y ago
Not literal copying, no, since the two codebases differ substantially, but they can look at the code for what the other has done to see how they did it and they can re-implement it without fear of patent infringement claims.
cycloptic 7y ago
Neither of those are significant -- both can be forked if it becomes necessary. GCC has a long history of forks, and half the reason clang is becoming popular is because the downstream vendors didn't like GPL and wanted to make proprietary forks.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  And GCC only became popular because UNIX vendors, starting with Sun, decided to sell the UNIX SDK separately from the base OS.