Starting from auto-generated code isn't considered a proper bootstrap process by the Bootstrappable Builds project. You need to be able to start without any binaries or auto-generated code from the project itself. Usually that would mean starting with a basic implementation in another language, but starting with an older version of the same project that was written in another language and then going through several older versions of different milestones is often easier than reimplementing the language from scratch in another language.

https://bootstrappable.org/

> Starting from auto-generated code isn't considered a proper bootstrap process by the Bootstrappable Builds project.

Is there a reason we should weigh the Bootstrappable Builds project's opinion highly here?

There's nothing on their benefits page that is subverted by an auto-generated compiler that's hand maintained.

Actually, there's no mention of auto-generated code in their best-practices section. Do you have a link to where they even say this?

I am quite sure bootstraping as concept, precedes by several decades that website.

Please read comments before responding

Why?

Probably because they'll start adding features to the Zig version that might not be trivially portable to the C++ version due to architectural differences.

I think because Zig compilers can compile C but not C++.

Zig can compile C++ just fine. Which is no surprise, since it's Clang doing the heavy lifting - Zig provides the convenient CLI.