C and C++ were closed source for quite some time, they still are in places like commercial embedded OSes and console dev kits, even when they happen to be GCC and clang forks nowadays.

Clang actually has replaced most GCC forks exactly because vendors can keep the fork closed source.

▲

redlewel 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Sure but at those times C and C++ had no immediate replacement, and if you were doing embedded C/C++ was your only option. The same cannot be said for Mojo.

	▲	mike_hearn 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		There were competitors. Pascal and assembly, most obviously. It was just a different culture. There was no expectation that everything should be free.
	▲	pjmlp 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		In that regard yes, personally I think Mojo has lost its opportunity, but not due being commercial. AMD/NVIDIA/Intel now having first class support for Python DSLs or GPU JITs for their APIs, and Julia as well.
	▲	3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]

▲

jibal 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The C compiler source came with the AT&T UNIX tape ... it wasn't open source because FOSS didn't exist at the time and it was under a proprietary license, but it was not "closed source". Parts of MOJO, OTOH, are closed source because the source has not been released (yet ... it apparently will be later this month).

	▲	pjmlp an hour ago \| parent [-]
		That one yes, the ones sold by all UNIX clone vendors definitely not. In fact, GCC was largely ignored until Sun decided to split SunOS into two SKUs.