[cfe-dev] "clang.org"

Wed Nov 13 07:54:17 PST 2013

Hi, let me explain my view as a "casual" but very interested potential win32 clang user.

Some months ago around 3.1 version I tried to get the windows version of clang up and running. It was long but I was determined and was able to build my own 3.1 version from svn.

I tested it a bit to discover it was partially ready for me, I'm primary interested in using it for cross compiling arm targets that was fine, and for use it as out day-to-day win32 version so we can have a easier multiplatform compiler support.

I followed the instructions without big issues, but at that evaluation stage a prebuild binary and a more user focused documentation would have been much more better for me.

>From my silly user point of view a section telling me what can I do and what I can't do with the windows toolchain would be  very useful.

As example, I learned the hard way how to find a linker that fill my needs, ld64, gnu ld, link.exe, etc... A reference detailing what do you need to target what platform and how to get it (binary if possible) is very interesting for someone that just  wants to compile code not hack with the toolchains.

I ended up hacking with the toolchains and enjoyed a lot, but is not cost effective for the average developer.

Unai Landa
CTO
ulanda at digital-legends.com<mailto:ulanda at digital-legends.com>

Digital Legends Entertainment
C/ Bruc 50, 2-4
08010 Barcelona (Spain)
Tel : +34 93 394 17 77
Fax: +34 93 304 35 05
www.digital-legends.com<http://www.digital-legends.com/>

This e-mail message contains confidential information and/or legally privileged and is intended only for the use of the addressed person. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this e-mail by any other person is strictly prohibited. If you believe that this e-mail message has been sent to you by error, please notify the sender by reply via e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Thank you.
________________________________
From: Yaron Keren [yaron.keren at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 11:57 AM
To: Chris Lattner
Cc: clang-dev Developers
Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] "clang.org"

While building llvm/clang from sources is entirely feasible, it requires setting up a non-trivial build environment, especially on Windows. The recently posted instructions setting up a windows builder summarize the process very well and show what's involved.

If we'd like to make clang a popular compiler (as it should!) this process in unreasonable. Someone wishing to just use clang wants a simple one-click solution and not a process setting it up. If not clang, he'll find his one click solution either with Visual C++ Express free edition or one of the MingW distributions.

The standard is to have a big DOWNLOAD button featured on the front page. This leads directly to the Windows installer (one-click!) or at most to a list of the last stable version pre-built binaries with the Windows as the default.
Why Windows? because that's what Windows users are expecting.
In other OS downloading sources and configure/make is reasonable as 1) the users are usually more knowledgeable and 2) the build environment is mostly (all?) ready. Not so with Windows.

The downloading process should be EZ : mindless and requires as few clicks as possible. Some practical examples are:

http://www.eclipse.org/
https://netbeans.org/
https://sourceforge.net/projects/mingwbuilds/

additional non-links should lead to development (ToT) pre-built binaries, web browsable sources and svn/git instructions. It is also be nice to have downloadable sources as tar/zip such as available on some sites as for some users installing svn/git may be a showstopper.

Specifically, on the current llvm site, the download link should be more prominent. It should list the pre-built binaries at first. It should link to the Windows pre-built binaries which currently are well hidden on the alpha site. Then it should also link to ToT ("Development") binaries and only finally to source codes and build instructions.

Yaron

2013/11/13 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com<mailto:clattner at apple.com>>
On Nov 12, 2013, at 10:18 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu<mailto:silvas at purdue.edu>> wrote:
I think that Alp made a really good point: "Clang" is a developer-facing product that a lot more developers interact with than compiler engineers.  llvm.org<http://llvm.org/> and even clang.llvm.org<http://clang.llvm.org/> are really focused on bringing people into the open source community and serving us compiler hackers, but it does a really poor job serving users that just want to use a compiler and look up a few options or language extensions.

When I reorganized the clang docs front page, I was actually amazed at how things fell out. We actually have a quite nice slice of docs that broadly fall under the category "Using Clang as a Compiler" <http://clang.llvm.org/docs/#using-clang-as-a-compiler>, and I made sure to put those front and center.

Yeah, that is great.  It would also be interesting to have a blogroll (or something) on it talking about various people using the compiler, tips and tricks, etc.

Oh, and the main web page could really use an update, being almost unmodified since its inception.

Yeah it would be nice to have a web site that looks like it was developed by a web designer, not a compiler hacker :) Our dragon logo is awesome, how did that come about? Maybe we could emulate that process to net a fresh fancy webpage. (I'm assuming that the dragon logo wasn't designed by a compiler hacker; if it was, then this is me bowing to their skill).

The dragon came about when Apple paid a 3rd party icon design company to design it for LLVM.  I gave them the guidance of "a high tech dragon" and a graphics artist did magic :-)

In many ways, this is the same problem that projects like Eclipse have.  Since eclipse is both a community and an IDE, the main "http://www.eclipse.org<http://www.eclipse.org/>" web site is pretty useless for people who just want a Java IDE.  I'm not finding any great examples of open source projects "doing it right", but linux.com<http://linux.com/> for example is targeted as users and advocates of the linux OS, not at kernel hackers.

I think the "normal" way to do it these days (for better or for worse) is for a project's home page to be entirely "non-developer-centric", but have a "github" ribbon/button that developers know to look for.

Right, it would make sense to keep clang.llvm.org<http://clang.llvm.org> as the compiler hackers kingdom.  There could be a prominent link from clang.org<http://clang.org> that points to it.

I think it could be really great to have a user-centric landing page, and if we do that, making clang.org<http://clang.org/> be it would be truly great.

Agreed. That sounds like a perfect use for the domain.

What do you think Alp?  Does this make sense to you?  I think this aligns with (my understanding of) your intended purpose for the domain, and would be fantastic for the project.

-Chris

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu>
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20131113/6ceea3a1/attachment.html>