>You'd break de facto compatibility with almost all C code for no reason.
The authors of that code should have written portable code if they didn't want it to break.
If a few people write unportable code in your language, they're bad programmers. But if everyone writes unportable code in your language, it's a bad language.
Re:A critique of "How to C in 2016"
by mondoshawan on Friday January 15, 2016 @07:55AM
(#10908973)
Texhnically, they did. The go to compiler for years was GCC, with all the GNU extensions turned on. The problem is that those extensions were classically on by default, so it was very easy to just use them without thinking too much about it.
On GNU/Linux, yes.
Outside world, there are tons of C compilers to chose from.
If you're designing a new ISA, it's extremely difficult to succeed in the market no matter what you do. But one excellent way to guarantee you won't succeed is to have that attitude toward your developers.
Same with bytes not being 8 bits. Nobody will ever make a system where that's not the case anymore. You'd break de facto compatibility with almost all C code for no reason. Market realities trump making systems "for fun".