6 ms·

This is mostly a Google project? Unclear from the repo who is sponsoring it.

• bardworx 4y ago
  Microsoft. - don’t listen to me, it’s Google.
  • moralestapia 4y ago
    It's Google but yes, another instance of Embrace, Extend and Extinguish. I hope this doesn't take off, with my sincere apologies to the ones who have been working hard on this. The last thing the C/C++ ecosystem needs is becoming de facto owned by a private company.
    • bardworx 4y ago
      Sorry, not in the ecosystem (clearly). Why not? Just curious.
      • moralestapia 4y ago
        No problem, here's some context, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
    • olliej 4y ago
      In fairness this is as opposed to Go? Swift? Rust? Java? C#? Then C and C++ are defacto controlled by private companies: Google+Apple do pretty much all the clang development, MS does MSVC - if they choose not to implement a feature that’s approved, or implement one that isn’t, that is the de facto standard. You can argue it would require all three to agree on something, but that’s still essentially making WG21 somewhat irrelevant.
      • spookie 4y ago
        Huh, aren't you forgetting someone?
        • saagarjha 4y ago
          RedHat ;)
      • pjmlp 4y ago
        > Google+Apple do pretty much all the clang development They don't anymore, that is why clang is lagging in ISO C++20 features, as no one else has taken up their roles.
    • dimitrios1 4y ago
      It hasn't been an issue at all for Go. As long as all the source is public, I don't see an issue using a large, overvalued tech monopoly for advancing technology.
    • labrador 4y ago
      I prefer a fast evolution when necessary to a slow committee process. I don't see any drawbacks, unless your the type that prefers to build consensus before moving forward
      • tsimionescu 4y ago
        I think most people feel today that, if anything, C++ is moving too fast (in terms of standards evolution), so I really don't see who wants an even faster changing C++.
    • tialaramex 4y ago
      At some point between here and like, shipping a language design and working prototype, the stated intent is to build a Foundation like for several other modern projects and then assign everything to the Foundation. ""We are planning to create an open source foundation and transfer all Carbon-related rights to it; our goal is for the foundation setup to be similar to other open source projects, such as LLVM or Kubernetes.""
      • saagarjha 4y ago
        Foundations don’t really mean much for open governance when you have a controlling stake in them.
    • intelVISA 4y ago
      I doubt it'll make much headway, though I'll admit this is the direction they should've started Rust on. Imagine if all this post-C++ effort was put into just making a functional package manager that'd be an actual game changer imo.
      • hyperhopper 4y ago
        Internally package management is not a problem at Google. It's the language itself.
• Taywee 4y ago
  Yeah. Basically think a C++ alternative by C++ developers who are dissatisfied with the standards committee.