Well yeah, point taken, but in this case it's sort of a moot point, though I can't discuss any details.

Just saw this thread. The answer is simple: different availability of external functions. That's not to say that there aren't things like wine or cygwin or busybox that aim to address this, though.

On the first basic note of the topic: java was the cross platform experiment that failed. Notoriously even Runescape had cross platform issues at one point, iirc. The problem is we can't have all these bells and whistles and updates and expect things to work forever or between systems. C++ is now even becomming a mess of breaking old shit. Right now i'd recommend nothing other than pure C, otherwise you'll be doing lots of rewrites and introduce security holes just trying to keep your code compile-able over the next 10 years.

How is C++ more problematic than C? All it does is add OOP to it.

Darvond, it does various things, but I can't go into detail.

Google got a voice in the consortium (which got hijacked by ISO), so now google's trying to make massive changes to C++. They're promising to largely leave C alone, but they're making major changes to C++ and it started with C++11. They're hoping with a future "version" that they can remove binary compatibility and define their own standards, which will break alot of DLLs and things. They're straight up trying to change the language as a whole, too, and deprecate alot of things. The whole situation is a mess. IIRC, they had to back off on half their plans for the last release. Here's an April Fools joke someone posted which i think will give you an accurate idea of the kind of BS that's going on: https://codingtidbit.com/2019/04/01/c22-fullptr-to-replace-nullptr/

So then just use an older version of C++ and it will work the same way that it always has. Problem solved.

Still, I don't see how google has much say in it, because the compiler makers can do whatever they damn-well please.

Google goes to ISO events. They're more or less trying to make C++ into GO it seems. As for an older version, that depends. It's likely that eventually tehy'll either cut support for old versions of C++ at some point make certain changes "downstream".

The problem is that they're messing with C++ at all. The language has been C with Classes for how long, now, and they're trying to change that.

Well then I guess you can switch to Eiffel or something.

ISO's on that one, too. I really hate anything ISO touches. I still remember the horror of trying to read the CD format in highschool. They had multiple definitions sections in their specifications, and they largely were all repeats. They know how to create a standard, but they don't understand the human element at all.

As for eiffel, no: i need something that i can actually use on a number of different systems. This translates to C. I'm not going to use Eiffel with an arduino. I also need something with more permanence. I thought about making a VM of my own in C and publishing the specifications and just writing in the assembly for that VM. It would be slower, but I could write the assembler in the VM's format so that all one has to do is make the VM to the specifications in an existing language (which should be beginner level in any language) and they have access to everything again.

Or I suppose you could just make a C compiler, and maybe make a different version of it for each OS if you need to, but if you want to make a VM then I guess it would be sort of like using C as though it were more like Java.

What's an arduino?

I could make a c compiler, too, but i'm also fine with ASM. The main reason i'd do this at this point is if C ends up going through the hell that C++ is going through. this

now i know where that head is from mr Cosmo's Cosmic