<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=iso-8859-1"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Oct 27, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Renato Golin <<a href="mailto:renato.golin@linaro.org">renato.golin@linaro.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">On 27 October 2013 15:25, Chris Lattner <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:clattner@apple.com" target="_blank">clattner@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34)">Even better! Can we start adopting C++'11 features in LLVM 3.3 then?</span></div></blockquote><div></div></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">This could be one of the design guidelines: use any feature supported by the last LLVM release.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Which could force some distros to compile Clang more than once, but it could also mean people would migrate faster to more modern compilers.</div></div></blockquote><br></div><div>I'm not sure what you mean. Are your proposing that clang 3.4 use any features supported by clang 3.3? If so, that won't work, because clang can't self-host on all interesting architectures, e.g. it isn't fully ABI compatible with Visual C++ (yet).</div><div><br></div><div>-Chris</div><br></body></html>