4 ms·

Thanks, so from "Only those features that have a history and are in common use by a commercial implementation should be considered", this precludes stuff that m

by shric 7y ago

Thanks, so from "Only those features that have a history and are in common use by a commercial implementation should be considered", this precludes stuff that may only exist in clang, gcc, glibc, etc.? If so, why?

AaronBallman 7y ago
I wouldn't read into "commercial" there, I think we meant "production-quality" instead. (We should fix that!) Basically, we prefer seeing features that real users have used as opposed to an experimental branch of a compiler that doesn't have usage experience. Knowing it can be implemented is one thing, but knowing users want to use it is more compelling.
parenthesis 7y ago
You could interpret that as "in common use by a commercial[ly used] implementation".