logoalt Hacker News

timmg • last Wednesday at 8:13 PM • 4 replies • view on HN

I wonder if this means Carbon is DOA.

I was excited to see what it would be. But I don't think I can argue that it makes as much sense anymore.


Replies

qalmakka • last Wednesday at 8:17 PM

Carbon was clearly DOA the moment it was announced, IMHO. It looked cool but it served none but Google, and now with LLMs you have a massive incentive not to use a niche or new language due to how better LLMs get the bigger the corpus is

The only somewhat realistic proposal in this space is Herb Sutter's cpp2, which is arguably a massive improvement and I'm puzzled why nobody in the standard thought to give it a spin, there's just to much cruft they'll never be able to get rid of unless they make an alternate yet backward compatible syntax with C++ that changes the defaults from "random 80s nonsense" to something better

➕ show 1 reply
pornel • yesterday at 12:22 AM

Carbon's own docs say:

> Existing modern languages already provide an excellent developer experience: Go, Swift, Kotlin, Rust, and many more. Developers that can use one of these existing languages should.

So the reason for Carbon to exist is gone. C++ code can be migrated straight to Rust without Carbon's stopgap.

➕ show 1 reply
DetroitThrow • yesterday at 5:29 PM

It was never built with an open source community in mind. It was always DOA in a world where Rust existed.

YuechenLi • last Wednesday at 8:26 PM

Version 0.0.0.0 after 4 years. Their goal of "full interop with C++ while being a completely new language without any of the flaws of C++" is plain absurd.

It's DOA because Google doesn't have any idea of what Carbon should be, and to be completely honest, at least 80% of what they currently use C++ for should be rewritten Go, you know, that language developed specifically because of the issues with C++ by teams within Google.