11–20 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re certainly not the only one. It’s a confusing choice of naming.
I hope they picked that name for the same reason Apple picked it: because all life is built on carbon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re certainly not the only one. It’s a confusing choice of naming.
I think the statute of limitations on “confusing name” when Mac OS Carbon was removed from OS X 10 years ago has passed.
There is of course no 'registry of allowed names that have aged-out' but there are probably other creative names one could come up with.
I really think the most exciting feature of Carbon (indeed, it's justification for existence) is its backwards compatibility with C++, followed closely by it's more modern and flexible governance structure. Even the docs in the repo say you should avoid Carbon unless you have lots of C++ code you need to interact with.
Unclear from the repo who is sponsoring it.
This is mostly a Google project? Unclear from the repo who is sponsoring it.
- don’t listen to me, it’s Google.
At first I thought this was about Mac OS around the 9 and 10 times... but I suppose not everyone is going to make that link with this name.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see what's special about Carbon here. In C++ the compiler can also optimize pass-by-const-reference to pass-by-value, and they do. It just can't do it across an ABI boundary, but that should only be an issue with dynamic libraries, and Carbon has to follow the standard ABI there as well. Just make sure the compiler knows it doesn't have to follow the standard ABI for every sym…
It's nothing really out of the ordinary ... also that particular optimization is meager in practice (on the order of 1%?). I know everything improvement adds up, but the author talks about it as if it was a game changer. I like the enthusiasm, though :D.
This is mostly a Google project? Unclear from the repo who is sponsoring it.