Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jenadine 1006 days ago
They should open source and upstream their patches to clang and llvm, and let the llvm community maintain it.
1 comments
nunobrito 1006 days ago
That doesn't pay the bills. Cases of profitable open source projects are very scarce and difficult to achieve.
link
jenadine 1006 days ago
I was referring to the changes they made to the compiler in their fork of clang, which makes the "catching up" with upstream clang challenging as they need to rebase.

They can still sell their IDE and runtime libraries.

link
signaru 1005 days ago
What they're adding are non standard C++ extensions only used by C++ Builder (properties, etc). There might be little benefit (and just maintenance cost) to upstream those to Clang. Clang also moves fast while it appears C++ Builder is still at C++17 [0].

[0] https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support/20

link