5 ms·
It's not in the standard itself, because the standard doesn't directly talk about ABI. But there was a vote within the committee not to break ABI, as you can se
by jcranmer 3y ago
It's not in the standard itself, because the standard doesn't directly talk about ABI. But there was a vote within the committee not to break ABI, as you can see in the Prague 2020 meeting here: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/n4855.pdf https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/n48... (scroll down to page 11). And if you ever listen into any committee meetings or try to present papers, ABI breaks are very serious concerns that can torpedo proposals.
- Verdex 3y agoYeah. Something doesn't have to be enshrined into the standard to be a major driving point in the language. The very existence of Carbon is due to the c++ committee not wanting to break abi compatibility.
- pjmlp 3y agoNot only that many of the Carbon devs are former clang contributors, and one reason that clang is now on third place regarding ISO support, is that other devs had to step into what was previously contributed by Apple (now busy with Swift) and Google (busy with Carbon/Rust).