Making libcxx compile with gcc 4.6.4

[Yaron Keren]

Hi,

There was a long discussion thread about compiler support here:

 http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2013-October/thread.html#32834

I currently use MingW gcc 4.6.4 because it's ABI compatible with clang on
Windows.
Rafael is working to make clang compatible with latest MingW 4.8 but that's
not ready yet.

Are the buildbots testing libcxx like they test llvm/clang?

Yaron



2013/11/22 Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com>

> On Nov 21, 2013, at 11:02 AM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 21, 2013, at 7:34 AM, Yaron Keren <yaron.keren at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Compiling libcxx with gcc 4.6.4 (MingW) produces these errors:
> >>
> >> type_traits:3280:31: error: expected primary-expression before
> 'decltype'
> >> type_traits:3280:29: error: expected ';' at end of member declaration
> >>
> >> memory:2415:49: error: function
> 'std::__1::default_delete<_Tp>::default_delete()' defaulted on its first
> declaration must not have an exception-specification
> >> memory:2435:49: error: function 'std::__1::default_delete<_Tp
> []>::default_delete()' defaulted on its first declaration must not have an
> exception-specification
> >>
> >> the attached patch defines _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_ADVANCED_SFINAE and
> _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_DEFAULTED_FUNCTIONS for gcc version < 4.7, making the
> library compile with gcc 4.6.4.
> >>
> >> Yaron
> >
> > I have no problems with the contents of this patch, but I think it’s
> time to ask a different question:
> >
> > What compilers are we willing to support for libc++?
> > Do we care about gcc 4.6? 4.5? 4.4? 4.3? 4.2? 4.1?
> > Is anyone testing with these compilers?
>
> Imho we should not be supporting compilers for which no one is using
> libc++.  Every additional compiler supported adds additional complexity to
> the libc++ code base.  It isn't cost-free.
>
> I think a rationale for every supported compiler needs to be made.  We
> should know why we're supporting a compiler.
>
> Howard
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20131122/5ac83900/attachment.html>