[cfe-dev] Switching http://llvm.org/demo to clang or providing a separate clang demo

[Tanya Lattner]

On Aug 26, 2011, at 5:26 PM, David Blaikie wrote:

> > Seems someone else got to this a while ago, but perhaps didn't quite
> > get enough feedback or have enough time to see it through:
> >
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-March/038828.html
> > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=1440
> >
> > If someone wants to give feedback on the changes posted in the bug I
> > can try to update it, or we can start again from scratch.
> >
> > I'm just working on getting this setup myself so I can see how it
> > looks/works locally.
> 
> Aha, this is the problem with attaching patches to bugs: noone sees them.  It is *much much* better to send patches to a -commits list.
> 
> The patch looks like reasonable progress to me!
> 
> So, colored clang diagnostics finally work :) & as a side-benefit, I got around to setting up my own demo test area (it actually wasn't too painful at all - the cgi script's fairly standalone, just had to point it to my llvm install & away it went - great) so I should be able to prototype stuff there & submit fairly sane patches directly against www/demo/index.cgi without too much churn.
> 
> So, now to figure out what to do with the page. The bug/patch I mentioned above seems to still have some outstanding issues (given the discussion in the bug itself) - cross compiling on the demo machine/website won't come for free. Any ideas on what we should do there? Should we actually get the demo machine setup with all the necessary libs/things to do real cross compilation?
> 

I wonder what the real benefit is here though versus the cost? If we are just trying to give a quick demo of LLVM/Clang, then how much value is in supporting multiple targets?

Also, whats the benefit in demoing targets that are not officially supported by releases?

> I'd like to roll in whatever work was already done for that patch that's actually applicable before I go forward with my own ideas. But for myself, the first thing I'd work on (& have worked up partially on my prototype site) is C++ version selection (could be generalized to all language versions supported by clang) and library selection (would require libc++ to be installed on the demo server, if it's not already there). 

I do think there are many things we could be displaying that Clang supports that we are not. 

> Any particular end goal you have in mind that would be worth doing some up-front design for, or is it good to just go adding these little bits on here & there & then try to redesign if we see a way to make it all fit together better?

I personally don't have any ideas for the demo page, but anything you come up with I say go ahead and prototype if its small and anything large, I'd send to the list for discussion before spending a lot of time on it. I'm sure some of the active Clang developers may have opinions.

Thanks,
Tanya

> 
> - David

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20110829/86c6a91f/attachment.html>