New competitor to D

[Paulo Pinto]

On Friday, 22 July 2022 at 07:10:02 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Friday, 22 July 2022 at 05:39:22 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> This is one of the reasons why clang is now third in ISO C++ 
>> support, and since no other compiler vendor that enjoys clang, 
>> seems willing to step into Apple (focused on 
>> Swift/Objective-C) or Google's previous roles, it doesn't look 
>> like it will change.
>
> Apple tutorials use Objective-C++, but I think they view it as 
> a support language for Swift.


Which tutorials?

Objective-C++ has been almost erradicated from Apple's developer 
site, only old timers like myself still have the docs in their 
original forms.

In what concerns C++ at Apple, the only uses of it are for IO Kit 
and Driver Kit (an embedded C++ subset), Metal Shading Language 
(a C++14 dialect), and whatever is needed on LLVM to support 
Swift and Objective-C implementations.

>
> Maybe GPL is the better license for programming languages... 
> gcc could benefit from clang being wiped out.
>
>> Meanwhile those previous clang contributors are now having fun 
>> tailoring Carbon as they wish instead of fighting for their 
>> papers at ISO.
>
> But they are not very good at it... They are going to end up 
> with some of D’s problems. They need an external qualified 
> reviewer.
>
> Also only support for C++17 as a stated goal does not make you 
> a C++ successor outside of big business legacy code bases.

Here is the thing, if the large majority of C++ world never moves 
beyond C++17, with cherry picked features from later standards, 
does it really matter?

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support

A paper standard only matter as much as there are actually 
compilers supporting it.