[cfe-dev] AST processing toolbox
clattner at apple.com
Sat Jun 13 10:02:19 PDT 2009
On Jun 13, 2009, at 9:35 AM, Sebastian Redl wrote:
>> So then, clang isn't going to be a drop-in replacement for g++ until
>> there are "enough" other compilers that implement the more
>> esoteric parts of C++?
> What do the requirements on the Clang codebase have to do with its
> suitability as a GCC drop-in replacement? I think you're
> something here.
Right, we want Clang to be able to build all the insane C++ constructs
in the world, but we don't want it to be *written* using them. :) The
goal is to keep the LLVM/Clang code base simple, readable, and portable.
More information about the cfe-dev