On 8/3/21 11:41 PM, Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals wrote:
>
>
> On 8/3/21 11:07 PM, Emile Cormier via Std-Proposals wrote:
>> Sorry, but who do you expect to get involved in a C++ language
>> extensions encumbered by patents? Does your "C++ Superset" allow a
>> patent-free, open-source implementation?
>
> Part of what I mentioned is patent pending but I can certainly loosen
> restrictions, but the Root Pointer headers will remain patented.
>
BTW thank God software can now be patented. Here's my anecdote:

- I was working for Corel Linux back in 2000 until Microsoft dissolved it;

- I wrote my own Fornux Powercalc and proposed it to Microsoft but got
silently embraced and extended my Microsoft Powertoys:

https://github.com/philippeb8/fcalc

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6f/Powercalc.PNG

- Herb Sutter from Microsoft almost embraced and extended the logic of
Root Pointer:

https://github.com/hsutter/gcpp


So sorry for the patent implications but this is the only way to protect
ourselves these days.


> Obviously following ISO standards is the way to go on the long term
> and to have robust support from other commercial compilers is
> desirable at the same time.
>
> Again:
>
> - 70% of cybersecurity problems are memory safety issues;
>
> - memory management is the leading cause of security vulnerabilities
> in Google Chrome;
>
> So 1 + 1 = 2. If we do not solve these problems then we'll have a huge
> national security issue with legacy code.
>
> So this is my contribution to the community at the same time.
>
>
Also Linus Torvalds said that "C++ solves the wrong problems" and
perhaps he was right if he was referring to memory management, but not
anymore. He can just run a C++ Superset compiler over his kernel and be
done with memory leaks and segfaults.


Regards,

-- 
*Phil Bouchard*
Founder & CTO
C.: (819) 328-4743
Fornux Logo <http://www.fornux.com>