kcgi VS bdwgc

You can use KCGI to use C or C++ as a FastCGI backend.

I like the premise of embedded generating inline c. Kinda like php for c, rather than html

I'm not sure of custom BNF per generating command. I notice they're mostly order independent, which makes it a little easier to learn, but what's the advantage over c syntax? Is it roughly that pointers etc are impossible. Maybe a c-esque syntax would be more learnable

How does the existing syntax compose, i.e. can the user run away with writing tcl-style scripts

If you don't get a lot of feedback, I would guess it is inpart due to custom syntax being an entry barrier to understanding

I don't know, I think html is easy, so people want power with php. On the other hand c is powerful and hard, by the time I'm using that, does Vely's custom syntax give me more than a set of convenient c library calls... such as https://kristaps.bsd.lv/kcgi/

In any case, I like the apis, and I think the premise has legs

It's not that hard, I use kcgi.

The C library used (https://github.com/kristapsdz/kcgi) is portable and working on linux as well. Putting this behind nginx as fastcgi seems very well doable.

Boehm GC is mentioned in the article: https://github.com/ivmai/bdwgc

This stuff is all implementation dependent. The Boehm garbage collector has been wrestling with the compilers for years regarding these issues, see its development repo.

Any kind of automatic GC is going to be rare in C. The only automatic garbage collection that I am aware of is the BDW garbage collector abet that uses mark and sweep instead of reference counting https://github.com/ivmai/bdwgc

My dude have you heard of Boehm GC