[cfe-dev] "clang.org"

[Reid Kleckner]

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:57 AM, Yaron Keren <yaron.keren at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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.
>

I agree.

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.
>

I'd rather keep the development builds somewhat hidden.  They are alpha,
after all.  When we do the 3.4 release, we should make a Windows installer
and put it with the other binary packages, which are currently the most
discoverable.


> 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>
>
>> On Nov 12, 2013, at 10:18 PM, Sean Silva <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 and even 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" 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 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 as the compiler
>> hackers kingdom.  There could be a prominent link from 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 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
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> 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/20131113/030045d6/attachment.html>