[cfe-dev] "clang.org"

[Yaron Keren]

We shouldn't hide any binary version. We may succeed = confusing a
candidate user who will get another compiler.

It is however very important to be clear what is what:

clang 3.3 is "Last stable version" = the version that works but does not
have all the new bells and whistles.
ToT svn is "Current development version" = the version with all the new
features but may contain news bugs.

To each his own.



2013/11/13 Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com>

>
> On 13/11/2013 16:58, Timur Iskhodzhanov wrote:
> > 2013/11/13 Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>:
> >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:57 AM, Yaron Keren <yaron.keren at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> 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.
> > Frankly, the 3.4 will be way "alpha" on Windows still due to byval,
> > RTTI and stuff...
>
> Hi Timur,
>
> Disagree strongly on this.
>
> The Windows build of clang 3.4 is absolutely production-grade in almost
> every area now. It's not a major problem if codegen isn't quite there
> yet as long as it's mentioned in the release notes.
>
> Compelling features like refactoring, the C SDK, Python API, static
> analyser -- nearly all the "exciting" features that set clang apart --
> are all production-grade on Windows and have been for some time.
>
> When it comes time to compile, there are plenty of commodity compilers
> out there that'll get the job done as a stopgap.
>
> clang 3.4 on Windows is something to announce and be proud of, not to
> hide away as 'alpha'
>
> Alp.
>
>
>
> >
> > 2013/11/12 "C. Bergström" <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>:
> >> My best guess would be an "experimental" branch(es) and "experimental"
> >> labeled binaries which the "community" can somehow publish more easily.
> > Isn't github a suitable place for this?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cfe-dev mailing list
> > cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
> --
> http://www.nuanti.com
> the browser experts
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131113/3d15f7e6/attachment.html>