Neither GCC nor Clang are compliant with standard C++
49 points by birdculture
by kloop
4 subcomments
Give how default gcc and clang are, along with the recommendation to update the standard instead of gcc and clang, it sounds like the standard is noncompliant with standard C++
Standard in the sense of commonly used or supplied
by rurban
0 subcomment
It's about language *linkages*, not about extern "C" vs C++ linkage.
It's about stdcall, cdecl, fastcall, vectorcall, watcall, and other calling conventions, which should be in the type. And they are.
> gcc and clang can't change their behavior because that would be a breaking ABI change
It's an API change. Breaking source code is generally an even bigger deal than breaking binary compatibility.
by ch_123
1 subcomments
Hot take: I feel like a lot of the original value of language standards was to unite multiple proprietary implementations of compilers/runtimes/etc. from different vendors, each of which had incentives to add non standard features to attract customers and keep them locked in. This has been significantly diminished in the last decade or two now that most languages have high quality open source implementations - now you can simply port your compiler of choice to the platform you need.
by jdw64
1 subcomments
But looking at this, it seems like something similar happened 12 years ago[1]. Why hasn't it been changed?
If you're starting a new project and can afford it, please for the love of the children, use a different systems language. In so many ways Odin, Rust, Zig, whatever are better. There will be growing pains with respect to collective knowledge and performance, but they are surmountable.
Context: I am a programmer and educator. I am so tired of informing people of these minutiae.
Hacker News