4 ms·
Well, I agree that standardisation and "maturity" (whatever that may mean) are not connected, but I think most C and C++ programmers (to name two very widely us
by zabzonk 6y ago
Well, I agree that standardisation and "maturity" (whatever that may mean) are not connected, but I think most C and C++ programmers (to name two very widely used languages that I personally have a lot of knowledge of) find the respective standards for those languages very helpful, and somewhat lament the lack of formal standards for other languages they may use.
- steveklabnik 6y agoYes. I do think that standardization is generally good. I am pro Rust getting a specification! I just think it is one pro among many, and not something required for success.
- moltonel3x 6y agoThe C and C++ specs are full of UB though, more like a "minimum common denominator" for compiler devs than a strict spec that users can rely on. It's way too easy to write spec-abiding code that behaves differently with different compilers/architectures/optimizations. Specs are definitely a good thing to have, but often they're just brandished as a bullet point without looking at the details: how good is the spec, what does it add over the existing tests/CI/RFCs/proofs, etc.