Google definitely biased…

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 11:03:41 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 10:03:35 UTC, Chris wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 12 August 2014 at 16:43:18 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>>>> If Google dropped Go tomorrow, there would be immediate 
>>>>> backing for new
>>>>> management of a fork.
>>>>
>>>> Sure, and we would have Go+, GNUGo, FreeGo (discontinued) 
>>>> and whatnot, each having a different philosophy. There would 
>>>> be flame wars on the internet and nobody would know which 
>>>> kind of Go to use.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just like any open language implementation out there.
>>>
>>> CRuby vs JRuby vs RubyMotion vs ...
>>> CPython vs Jython vs ...
>>> Clang vs gcc vs msvc vs icc vs aC++ vs xlc vs ....
>>>
>>> Or for that matter
>>>
>>> Dmd vs ldc vs gdc
>>
>> Which is not what I meant. For Python and C etc there is still 
>> one reference implementation of the language, regardless of 
>> compilers or additional frameworks. What I meant were 
>> different _implementations_ of the language with different 
>> features and libraries, like Phobos and Tango (back in the 
>> day). That might happen to Go, if Google let it, well, go.
>
> There isn't such a thing as one reference implementation for C, 
> given the amount of undefined and unspecified behavior in the 
> standard.
>
> To the point many C developers mistakenly take their compiler 
> behavior, and extensions, as what to expect from the standard.
>
> --
> Paulo

But you can start to program in standard C99 and be sure that in 
99% of all cases it will compile and work. Same goes for Python 
and PHP etc. Remember Phobos vs. Tango? This must have put a lot 
of people off back then.