What advantages does this offer over Darktable, the long standing FOSS lightroom alternative?

Edit: One criticism of Darktable is that it emphasizes its "scene-referred workflow" as opposed to a "display-referred workflow" like Lightroom does, making it not a true Lightroom alternative. Seems like this also happens to be written in C++ and also uses a scene-referred workflow? Quite the coincidence. How much of the important design decisions (or implementation) are just copied from Darktable?

The scene-referred workflow is vastly superior because it makes all the adjustments before the full Raw data is converted to the display space.

You don't even need to know what that means for it to be useful. In practice, it just means less artifacts, less weird stuff that happens with color near clipping highlights, etc. You use the software in exactly the same way you'd use the display-referred workflow, except that under the hood, the modules are working with the linear Raw data.

Darktable is GPL-3.0 licensed, meaning that I would have to attribute Darktable if it was used in the project. I chose C++ because it is extremely fast. I built this because I was frustrated that Darktable had such a high learning curve. No code was copied from Darktable with my knowledge. As for your comments about the workflow, I will look into that and make sure that this project gives credit where credit is due. Thanks for your feedback.

Note after a quick question to Claude: The workflow is inspired by Darktable, but none of its code was copied. This project aims at approachability versus darktable's many features.

I will admit that all in all darktable has a more comprehensive set of controls over editing. However, it is harder software to use.