3 ms·
I've only seen the wars over when and if to adopt new C and C++ standards in the distant periphery, but it seems like any attempt to encode human interests and
by Kye 3y ago
I've only seen the wars over when and if to adopt new C and C++ standards in the distant periphery, but it seems like any attempt to encode human interests and needs into systems through code brings about strife. The politics there might be less visible since it happens on mailing lists and old forums no one's ever heard of, but the only difference is visibility.
New languages will inevitably adopt the means of communication they grew up in. That's blogs and gists and tweets.
- jhatemyjob 3y agoYes of course C++ isn't any better. C is a weird one since it's the "original language", the base layer of abstraction so-to-speak so C89 is going to be the standard forever. The standards committee around that one has zero power (as far as I can tell). What I'm comparing Rust/Swift/Go to are languages like MoonScript/Objective-C/Lua, where there is a single BDFL (Leafo/Steve Jobs/Roberto). I feel like for programming languages there should only be 1 or 2 developers, that way there is no conflict of interest or "creative differences"
- makapuf 3y agoThats funny, because that same person we are talking about battled the C standard committee (with bureaucracy, not specific people) into accepting #embed : https://thephd.dev/finally-embed-in-c23 https://thephd.dev/finally-embed-in-c23
- jhatemyjob 3y agoWow nice post. Interesting lens into standards committee politics. Also in my original comment I meant C99, not C89. Everything after C99 is kind of irrelevant. That's what makes C so cool. It's frozen in time, essentially. Can't be corrupted.