31–40 of 119 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> inappropriately dressed How do you think Anubis should dress?
Perhaps like he is depicted in temples, like this one from the tomb of Horemheb; 1323-1295 BC: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_King_with_Anubis...
Good. Let me use modules!
Shouldn't the compilers be on the bleeding edge of the standards? What is the downside of switching to the newest standard when it's properly supported? It's the type of dog fooding they should be doing! It's one reason why people care so much about self-hosted compilers, it's a demonstration of maturity of the language/compiler.
Backwards compatibility. Not all legal old syntax is necessarily legal new syntax[1], so there is the possibility that perfectly valid C++11 code exists in the wild that won't build with a new gcc.
[1] The big one is obviously new keywords[2]. In older C++, it's legal to have a variable named "requires" or "consteval", and now it's not. Obviously these aren't huge problems, but compatibility is important for legacy code, and there is a lot of legacy C++.
[2] Something where C++ and C standards writers have diverged in philosophy. C++ makes breaking changes all the time, where C really doesn't (new keywords are added in an underscored namespace and you have to use new headers to expose them with the official syntax). You can build a 1978 K&R program with "cc" at the command line of a freshly installed Debian Unstable in 2025 and it works[3], which is pretty amazing.
[3] Well, as long as it worked on a VAX. PDP-11 code is obviously likely to break due to word size issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right? I hope it never goes away, we should make the web more fun instead of sad and clean!
I think if you were to poll people, a significant portion would be repulsed by this catgirl aesthetic, or (though this isn't the case for Anubis) the cliche inappropriately dressed inappropriately young anime characters dawned as mascots in an ever increasing number of projects. People can do whatever they want with their projects, but I feel like the people who like this crap perhaps don't understand how repulsive i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anubis has been around for almost a year now, but it's also not particularly relevant to the content of the email thread.
It's particularly jarring to basically every site I've seen it on which is usually some serious and professional looking open source site. I wonder why nobody configures this, is this not something that they can configure themselves to a more relevant image, like the GCC logo or something?
That anime gating is very jarring, thought I clicked on the wrong link and clicked back.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps like he is depicted in temples, like this one from the tomb of Horemheb; 1323-1295 BC: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_King_with_Anubis...
a dog man wearing short skirts is also inappropriate in my opinion
That anime gating is very jarring, thought I clicked on the wrong link and clicked back.
That said, more on topic, I am really glad that C++ actually considers the implications of switching default targets and only does this every 5 years. That's a decent amount of time and longer than most distros release cycles.
When a language changes significantly faster than release cycles (ie, rustc being a different compiler every 3 months) it means that distros cannot self-host if they use rust code in their software. ie, with Apt now having rust code, and Debian's release cycle being 4 years for LTS, debian's shipped rustc won't be able to compile Apt.
Shouldn't the compilers be on the bleeding edge of the standards? What is the downside of switching to the newest standard when it's properly supported? It's the type of dog fooding they should be doing! It's one reason why people care so much about self-hosted compilers, it's a demonstration of maturity of the language/compiler.
There's a bootstrapping process that has to happen to compile the compiler. Moving up the language standard chain requires that compilers compiling the compiler need to also migrate up the chain. So you can never be perfectly bleeding edge as it'd keep you from being able to build your compiler with an older compiler that doesn't support those bleeding edge features. Imagine, for example, that you are debian and you…
Shouldn't the compilers be on the bleeding edge of the standards? What is the downside of switching to the newest standard when it's properly supported? It's the type of dog fooding they should be doing! It's one reason why people care so much about self-hosted compilers, it's a demonstration of maturity of the language/compiler.
There's a bootstrapping process that has to happen to compile the compiler. Moving up the language standard chain requires that compilers compiling the compiler need to also migrate up the chain. So you can never be perfectly bleeding edge as it'd keep you from being able to build your compiler with an older compiler that doesn't support those bleeding edge features. Imagine, for example, that you are debian and you…