Linked by R_T_F_M on Thu 13th Sep 2012 21:19 UTC
FreeBSD "For the past several years we've been working towards migrating from GCC to Clang/LLVM as our default compiler. We intend to ship FreeBSD 10.0 with Clang as the default compiler on i386 and amd64 platforms. To this end, we will make WITH_CLANG_IS_CC the default on i386 and amd64 platforms on November 4th."
Permalink for comment 535210
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: C++
by moondevil on Sat 15th Sep 2012 14:02 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: C++"
Member since:

We're talking about different things. COM is an object-communication system, not a library linking system. As far as I can understand it (and I'm not a Windows developer), COM would take care of the problem of communicating objects between heterogeneous languages, but it's not an ABI or linking standard and it wouldn't take care of actually linking the program units in the first place.

Since when? COM is all about libraries.

Your COM components can exist in separate executables, for more security. In this case a kind of local RPC is used.

However, most COM components are actually dynamic libraries that get dynamically linked with your application and follow the same format as C++ VMT. No communication going on here.

In Windows 8 COM got extended. Now with WinRT, COM makes use of .NET metadata for language interoperation.

If Metro succeeds, many Windows developers believe Win32 might be in the legacy path, with WinRT taking over the full spectrum of Windows APIs.

"Again, C as lingua franca only works if C is the language exposed by the operating system. Lets not forget there were system programming languages before it, and after it, why should C exist forever?

And the system-development languages before it blew, which is why C was developed. And the system-development languages used after it have to be restricted; remember the above post about how C++, when used as a kernel language, can't make use of a laundry-list of features? That's because of the same problem; you can't use features that would require the generation of implicit premains, or would refer to state that the underlying system is supposed to maintain (because in a kernel, there is no underlying system). The system-development-safe part of C++ you end up with isn't much larger or much different than C.

C got developed, because of UNIX. If UNIX had failed in the market, most probably no one would be talking about C today.

Now UNIX got successfull, everyone wanted to have UNIX like utilities and C started to be ported everywhere.

The day, operating system vendors start using another language for systems programming, like Microsoft is doing now with Windows 8, then C starts to loose its influence in this area as well. At least in the desktop area.

If the operating system vendor does not offer you a C compiler, or C like APIs, then there is not a C interface to talk about.

You FORTRAN compiler, Ada compiler will need to support another type of interface.

This is nothing new. From what I know, there are no C like interfaces in mainframe systems, and you are forced to use whatever call convention the OS vendor decided upon.

Reply Parent Score: 2