Blender does not have a C++ API, and therefore the ability to write C++ plugins. This is basically included in the anti-features. And the problem is that this deprives it of flexibility, extensibility, which is critical for large studios (and judging by my observations, the problem does not go away depending on what kind of production the studio has: even movies and VFX, even cartoons). But at the same time, the blender is licensed under the GNU GPL. Its code is open, and you have the right to change the source code as you want, no one and nothing can stop you.
And it turns out this situation: C++ plugins make it possible to add very advanced functions, but at the same time open source gives this opportunity. and even more: you can fix the key problems in the architecture, which definitely can’t be done by plugins. It turns out that when analyzing for studios, the lack of a C++ API against the background of open source is not a problem.
Am I right, or does my lack of experience not allow me to see the subtleties, and with it other problems? I decided to ask here, because in addition to developers, there are clearly people from the industry here
sorry, but while not directly a feature request, it’s doing the not a feature request limbo dance so i’m gonna have to treat it like one and close this thread.