2 ms·
Paraphrasing the point at the end, there is no company that has the financial incentives to promote it. The companies that do have financial interests in CL ar
by taeric 3y ago
Paraphrasing the point at the end, there is no company that has the financial incentives to promote it. The companies that do have financial interests in CL are ironically not incentivized to promote the free ecosystem around it. For the same reason that commercial C compilers are not really a thing anymore.
This is, of course, a simplified view of things. For one, I think Intel still pushes a compiler some. That said, I think it is valid enough, in that Intel isn't pushing the compiler for the sake of the language it compiles, but to push some optimizations that they excel at.
There is a question of how explanatory this is. I think it is fairly accurate to say that the marketing and general outreach for many of the successful languages today helped build on their popularity to the point that we know them today. It does not explain the seed of any success, though.
- znpy 3y agoAfaik intel compilers are based on llvm nowadays
- taeric 3y agoRight, I don't know the core details right off, I just meant that it was easy to think of some commercial C vendors that still exist. I think it is fair that there is a difference in having a corporate sponsor, and having a organization chartered to sponsor. (I also have to ack that I don't know of many other C vendors, nowadays?)