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

[Reid Kleckner]

Chrome still ships with VS2010.  LLVM is only brought into Chrome via
PNaCl, I think, but I don't think it's built with MSVC.  Maybe JF could say
more.

The initial release of 2012 had lots of miscompiles, most of which
should've been fixed in update 1.  I think the story was the same for 2013.

I'm not sure why Chrome hasn't moved up to 2012 now that bugs are fixed.
 My best guess would be that LTO memory usage increased, breaking the
32-bit official release build.

It sounds like WebKit will link in LLVM soon, and they may still be on the
same toolchain trajectory as Chrome.

As Doug mentioned, a lot of LLVM users live close to TOT, so moving to
C++11 in two months is a much more immediate change for them than a release
8 months away.

Personally, I'd be happy to move, but it's not much trouble for me.  :)
 The only thing I don't like about C++11 so far from reading lld is to see
std::move slapped on every return value under the sun.  =P


On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Oct 31, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 31 October 2013 00:24, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The timeframe “2 whole years” might seem like a long time to us, but not
>> everybody lives in the world where they adopt new toolsets so quickly.
>>  That’s my concern about dropping VS 2010 support.  So this is both a
>> question about how fast Visual Studio moves, but also the people who use
>> Visual Studio.
>>
>> Agreed. I think the question here is whether or not it's reasonable for
>> this change and less whether or not it's reasonable as a path for each
>> release to then deprecate everything more than 2 years old. I'd like to get
>> rid of VS2010 because I want the features of 2012 and few of the current
>> people developing on windows have spoken up (and most of them positively),
>> but you do quite a bit of work and maintenance with windows so your
>> thoughts are definitely important here. Do you think it's reasonable?
>>
>
> You guys are still taking it too literally... ;)
>
> Let's take one decision at a time. We seem not to have any reason to keep
> VS2010 support. Check box.
>
>
> Not quite :). At present, we (= Apple) still have some dependencies on
> building top-of-tree Clang with VS2010. We’re currently investigating how
> quickly we can move those to VS2012 or newer.
>
> - Doug
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131031/d8898e99/attachment.html>