[cfe-dev] AST processing toolbox

[Chris Lattner]

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  
> misunderstanding
> 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.

-Chris