Originally posted by LightBit
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
LLVM's Clang Compiler Is Now C++11 Feature Complete
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by LightBit View PostIt did on start. C was being implemented from 1969 and standardized in 1990.
Comment
-
Originally posted by artivision View PostThat multi-tread model that some of you describe doesn't exist. For example, a video encoding program can have 1000 threads for a movie. That's because a movie has a key-frame every 6 second and the next frames are depend on that frame. So 6000 seconds=1000 maximum possible threads. Cannot have 2000 threads even if "God" wants to. An office program cannot have more than two threads for the same reason. You have a program with if/else, first goes the one and only then the other. You have two equations, you cannot run them in parallel because the outcome of the first is a variable of the second, so you must have the first finished. Programming language has nothing to do with paralelization. And those helpers cannot do magically the job.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RahulSundaram View PostYou are confusing two very different things here. C, C++ etc had no standards at all initially. Some popular compiler extensions have been standardized because they got adopted by other compilers but once the standardization process starts, a specification comes with a prototype implementation but the final implementation is done after the full standard is published. This is the only feasible way to implement a language standard with multiple competing implementations.
So they saw problems and ignore them?
They could wait until next revision.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LightBit View PostPrototype implementation is fine.
So they saw problems and ignore them?
They could wait until next revision.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RahulSundaram View PostI gave you a reference which shows the details. If you bothered to read, you would know that the issues didn't come up in the prototype implemention and moreover it isn't a major feature at all. So I don't see why you anyone should care.
I don't really care, but C++ programers should care since it is standard not a recommendation.
If it is so unimportant feature, why standardize it?
Comment
-
Originally posted by LightBit View PostThat means prototype implementation was too incomplete.
I don't really care, but C++ programers should care since it is standard not a recommendation.
If it is so unimportant feature, why standardize it?
Comment
-
Originally posted by RahulSundaram View PostNo, it doesn't mean that at all and you would have known that had you read the reference and understood it. Why should C++ programmers care when no compiler implements it? If it was implemented, it might have an useful feature. Now that noone is implementing it, the next revision might deprecate it. Thats how standardization works.
Comment
Comment