[cfe-dev] [LLVMdev] RFC: A proposal to move toward using C++11 features in LLVM & Clang / bounding support for old host compilers

[David Tweed]

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:38 PM, "C. Bergström" <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>wrote:

> On 11/ 7/13 12:27 AM, Tim Northover wrote:
>
>> If the new feature requires out-of-tree LLVM users to upgrade their
>>>> toolchains then we may only be giving them a month or less warning,
>>>> even if we are giving downstream packagers 6 months.
>>>>
>>> Correct.  That's not enough warning.
>>>
>> If we decide to delay this yet again (it's been on the cards since
>> January, so I'm personally opposed, but still...) we should at least
>> start counting the "acceptable notice" from the start of this thread
>> rather than when the dust settles.
>>
> because a discussion starts - and the Tea party wants their way.. it
> doesn't mean it's final. I'd love to ignore this thread until something is
> actually announced... with "proper" notice..
>

A personal question: is there any way we could modify some part of the
build to do some of the "non-fatal but difficult to ignore" announcement if
the building compiler can't handle the upcoming constructs? Eg, just
thinking off the top of my head here, could we abuse the make check/lit
mechanism to get a file with C++11 features that are going to be used in X
months compiled with the building compiler, so that people running projects
following ToT and who run "make check" regularly will get a new failure if
they'll be facing problems ahead? I suspect actually using the tests would
be more trouble than it's worth in terms of public buildbots, but something
that showed that there was an upcoming issue that happened each time you
rebuilt LLVM as you follow ToT might help keep the mandatory warning period
from becoming really high.

-- 
cheers, dave tweed__________________________
high-performance computing and machine vision expert: david.tweed at gmail.com
"while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python." --
attempted insult seen on slashdot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20131106/f266f16c/attachment.html>