Because they can't do breaking changes and must live with legacy baggage.
While zig can work use modern techniques without such issues
This is wrong because you can strip out C++ code you don't need. Green code doesn't need to worry about legacy baggage
And how do you identify the unneeded code in a compiler?
Which is used all over the world?
A smaller binary will not necessarily be faster - specialization can bloat code size, but having a specific version for a given subtype can be much faster. It’s a tradeoff.
Re:Zig is now self–hosted by default
by kristoff_it on Sunday August 21, 2022 @06:41AM
(#32538904)
right after that sentence there's a link to a talk that explains one way this is true
We can hardly be expected to watch a 46 minute video on "A Practical Guide to Applying Data-Oriented Design" to find our answer. It seems unpromising on the surface.
Re:Zig is now self–hosted by default
by JonChesterfield on Sunday August 21, 2022 @12:31PM
(#32541761)
Data oriented design is why the thing is faster.
This seems fairly significant to me and makes me wonder how this is possible with all the effort that has gone into optimizing C++