Cargo-style dependency management for C, C++ and other languages with Meson

Re:Cargo-style dependency management for C, C++ and other la... by baq on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @02:51AM (#24845357)

it isn't a serious language because it doesn't have a standard? is python somehow a joke? i agree with the docs part but there's plenty of de facto standards in the industry and in the civilization at large and they're pretty serious things.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cargo-style dependency management for C, C++ and other la... by afiori on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @03:55AM (#24845673)

Taking the strongest version of the argument Python is partly standardized in multiple implementations.

My understanding is that mostly CPython does whatever it wants and the other follows, but it is still better than a single implementation where the boundary between bug and spec would be nebulous.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cargo-style dependency management for C, C++ and other la... by int_19h on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @08:52AM (#24847306)

Not quite - CPython docs specifically say that some things are implementation-specific, and that other implementations are free to do them differently. For example, there's no guarantee of refcounting, and portable Python code has to assume that implicit cleanup is non-deterministic (which is observable with __del__).

The problem, rather, is that coders tend to ignore this, and write code that only works on CPython.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cargo-style dependency management for C, C++ and other la... by afiori on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @11:22AM (#24848708)

This is what I meant as the advantage of multiple implementations, by "CPython does whatever it wants" I meant that the power dynamics are almost exclusively in favour of CPython

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cargo-style dependency management for C, C++ and other la... by otabdeveloper4 on Wednesday October 21, 2020 @04:04AM (#24845721)

Yeah, but Python is competing with Perl and Ruby, not C.

[ Parent | on HN ]