Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by panick21_ 784 days ago
> Right now, most devices on the market do not support the C extension

That's outright false.

And outside of the actual devices, the whole software ecosystem very much uses the C extension.

Qualcomm simply wants to break the standard to make money, that literally all it is.

> Qualcomm wants to remove it because it is actively harmful for fast implementations

Funny how not a single company other then Qualcomm argues this. Not Ventara, not Si-Five, not Esperanto, not Tenstorrent, non of the companies form China.

Its almost, almost as if it not that big of a deal and Qualcomm simply want to same money and reuse ARM IP.

> The solution to fragmentation is to just disable the C extension everywhere, but SiFive doesn't want to hear that.

Literally nobody except Qualcomm wants to hear it. It wasn't even a discussion before Qualcomm. All the other companies had plenty of opportunity to bring up issues in all the working groups, and nobody did. Literally not a single company gave a talk, talking about how the C extension was holding them back. In fact most of them were saying the opposite.

1 comments

There is a lot of stuff behind the scene you don't know. You statement about "other companies" is completely wrong.
These things are supposed to be discuss in the open, its an open standards process. So please link me to the official statements by these companies that they are unhappy.

I have watched many discussions and updates by the work-groups, and nobody came forward.

And why are they afraid to come forward? If this is so important then shouldn't there be an effort to convince the community?

So sorry until I see something other claims like 'there is a shadow cabal of unhappy companies planning a takeover' I'm not gone buy that this is widespread movement.

>I have watched many discussions and updates by the work-groups, and nobody came forward.

Rivos came forward. They (kindly) told Qualcomm not to put words on their mouth.

Rivos is, of course, totally fine with C.

Yup. Rivos said basically "Please don't interpret our willingness to look at your data, once you provide it, as supporting your claims"
pray tell