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

[Nico Weber]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Oct 31, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> wrote:
>
> On 31 October 2013 09:41, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> Good to know. Since this is mostly related to 3.5, we still have
> half-a-year to make sure it won't break big things.
>
>
> Yeah. I’d like to hear about regarding Chrome’s dependencies as well; we
> don’t want to break them.
>

If clang starts using C++11 library features (i.e.links to libc++) it won't
run on 10.6 any longer. At the moment all our builders are still on 10.6
(since that's the oldest OS X version we run chrome on), but we wanted to
upgrade the builders to something newer anyways, so having a forcing
function for that isn't terrible I suppose.

Nico


>
> This whole discussion, in my view, was more to put the thought into our
> heads, so that we can plan ahead for deprecating old compilers and add
> language features that would make the code more readable and extensible.
> The time frame can stretch to accommodate people's schedules, but at least
> I think most of us agree it's a good move forward.
>
>
> Oh, I fully agree that this is a good move forward, and I fully expect
> we’ll be able to make it for 3.5.
>
> - 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/llvm-dev/attachments/20131031/5f898ef0/attachment.html>