7 votes

The day the standard library died

1 comment

  1. joplin
    Link
    While the author's assessment isn't wrong, it does leave out the positives of having a stable ABI. The reason why you want a stable ABI is so that you can do things like compile dynamically loaded...

    While the author's assessment isn't wrong, it does leave out the positives of having a stable ABI. The reason why you want a stable ABI is so that you can do things like compile dynamically loaded code with different compiler versions and still be able to load and run it.

    I work on designing an API for 3rd parties to hook into our application, and we abandoned C++ as the language of choice decades ago because of this problem. I'd rather we were using C++ for much of it, and so would our developers, but we couldn't because every release of the compiler potentially meant breaking existing plug-ins. And forget about developers trying to support the current and previous version, too.

    So yeah, it comes at a cost, but so does breaking the ABI frequently. Calling the standard library "dead" because of this issue is just dumb.

    4 votes