4 ms·

I suppose threatening to strike GCC developers with nukes might be more effective than bounties, but it also seems like a lot more expensive to carry out.

by cozzyd 5y ago

rurban 5y ago
Not GCC, just gfortran. No support for f2018 yet. GCC itself also doesn't have full support for c11 yet. Which was 7 years earlier. So they seem to have other priorities than fulfilling standards
- cozzyd 5y ago
  Sure, but gfortran is part of the GNU Compiler Collection :) And I think there is C11 support other than optional parts? https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status
- turminal 5y ago
  > GCC itself also doesn't have full support for c11 yet. Neither do other, much better funded compilers, to be fair.
  - rurban 5y ago
    msvc and embarcadero do, imho. clang and icc not.
  - Someone 5y ago
    Are there much better funded compilers? I don’t think we know much about how much funding the various compilers get. Apple/Intel/Microsoft may have lots of money, but that doesn’t mean their C compiler teams get much funding. I hear people say Apple’s work on clang is limited to their needs, and those may not involve getting full C11 support. Microsoft also may not need full C11 support for their internal use. That can make getting that a low or zero priority task. Intel recently moved their backend to LLVM. That doesn’t give me confidence they’re investing heavily there. Now, gcc technically is volunteer work, but lots of development is done by people paid to do that by their employers.
    - worik 5y ago
      Apple clearly does not fund any developer tools properly. I am developing software for iOS and the tooling is very bad. It sure looks good. Nice colours.
    - pkaye 5y ago
      We used to use ARM proprietary C compilers at my last job doing firmware. Every time a compiler bug was fixed in one version to the next a new one was introduced. So we ended up sticking with a particular version that worked well and keep evaluating new ones till a better one is found. And we paid tons of money for the compilers and support contract back then. Maybe the situation is better these days.
      - cozzyd 5y ago
        What was wrong with arm-eabi-none-gcc? No platform suppport?
- btdmaster 5y ago
  What is missing from full C11 support? I couldn't find any documentation on this other than C11Status[1] which looks fine. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status
  - jlarocco 5y ago
    I don't know, but this more in-depth status page punts with "Library feature, no compiler support required", quite a bit: https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html I can't find a similar page for glibc, so maybe the issue is there?

I suppose threatening to strike GCC developers with nukes might be more effective than bounties, but it also seems like a lot more expensive to carry out.

by cozzyd 5y ago

I suppose threatening to strike GCC developers with nukes might be more effective than bounties, but it also seems like a lot more expensive to carry out.

rurban 5y ago

Not GCC, just gfortran. No support for f2018 yet. GCC itself also doesn't have full support for c11 yet. Which was 7 years earlier. So they seem to have other priorities than fulfilling standards

cozzyd 5y ago
Sure, but gfortran is part of the GNU Compiler Collection :) And I think there is C11 support other than optional parts? https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status
turminal 5y ago
> GCC itself also doesn't have full support for c11 yet. Neither do other, much better funded compilers, to be fair.
- rurban 5y ago
  msvc and embarcadero do, imho. clang and icc not.
- Someone 5y ago
  Are there much better funded compilers? I don’t think we know much about how much funding the various compilers get. Apple/Intel/Microsoft may have lots of money, but that doesn’t mean their C compiler teams get much funding. I hear people say Apple’s work on clang is limited to their needs, and those may not involve getting full C11 support. Microsoft also may not need full C11 support for their internal use. That can make getting that a low or zero priority task. Intel recently moved their backend to LLVM. That doesn’t give me confidence they’re investing heavily there. Now, gcc technically is volunteer work, but lots of development is done by people paid to do that by their employers.
  - worik 5y ago
    Apple clearly does not fund any developer tools properly. I am developing software for iOS and the tooling is very bad. It sure looks good. Nice colours.
  - pkaye 5y ago
    We used to use ARM proprietary C compilers at my last job doing firmware. Every time a compiler bug was fixed in one version to the next a new one was introduced. So we ended up sticking with a particular version that worked well and keep evaluating new ones till a better one is found. And we paid tons of money for the compilers and support contract back then. Maybe the situation is better these days.
    - cozzyd 5y ago
      What was wrong with arm-eabi-none-gcc? No platform suppport?
btdmaster 5y ago
What is missing from full C11 support? I couldn't find any documentation on this other than C11Status[1] which looks fine. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status
- jlarocco 5y ago
  I don't know, but this more in-depth status page punts with "Library feature, no compiler support required", quite a bit: https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html I can't find a similar page for glibc, so maybe the issue is there?