Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions

On 04/06/2024 05:58, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 04:46:59 +0200, Bonita Montero wrote:
 

Am 04.06.2024 um 04:07 schrieb Lawrence D'Oliveiro:
>

On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 18:39:55 +0200, Bonita Montero wrote:
>

MSVC quitted compilation after allocating 50GB of
memory, gcc and clang compiled for minutes.

>
Next time, don’t even bother with MSVC.

>
MSVC has the most conforming C++20-frontend.

 Somehow I find that hard to believe
<https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-14/changes.html#cxx>.

For a more independent source, look at:
<https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support/20>
Given the position of "cppreference.com" as the reference site recommended by the C++ committee, that's about as close to an "official" list as you can reasonably get.
And it shows that gcc has had most of C++20 language support since version 9 or 10, and by version 11 there are just minor issues left. (There are /always/ a few minor issues.)  Equally, MSVC supports everything but a few minor issues.  (So does clang.)
It's a different matter going forward - for C++23, gcc and clang are basically complete, while MSVC has just got started on the language features (they are doing well for the C++23 library).
More relevant for /this/ group would be C support:
<https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/compiler_support/23>
gcc and clang have implemented most of C23 already, while MSVC has just a couple of small bits backported from recent C++ standards.  (And nobody has #embed yet!)
I am sure MSVC has lots to recommend it as a C++ tool for Windows.  But rapid support for new standards is /not/ a strong point in comparison to the other big toolchains.