[llvm-dev] Upgrading to MSVC 2015

[Sean Silva via llvm-dev]

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> There are certainly enough people making commits that work with VS2015 but
> not VS2013 that the "would it be useful" question is pretty well answered.
> I've already brought up the idea on my team, as it's obviously coming and
> we need time to coordinate with internal consumers of the toolchain.
>

Also, we have an increasing number of parts of the codebase that are
working around VS2013's inability to generate move constructors.
This is all over the new PM code and the passes ported to the new PM.
It has caused me personally hours of lost time and generally penalizes good
coding practices (exporting lifetime management to RAII is only so
convenient if you can't have a move-only type like a unique_ptr without
manually writing out move constructor/assign; and the diagnostics when this
VS2013 deficiency raises its head are.... confusing).

-- Sean Silva



> --paulr
>
>
>
> *From:* llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] *On Behalf Of *Zachary
> Turner via llvm-dev
> *Sent:* Friday, July 29, 2016 11:35 AM
> *To:* Piotr Padlewski; Aaron Ballman
> *Cc:* llvm-dev
> *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Upgrading to MSVC 2015
>
>
>
> Probably not.  It's very confusing because they are transitioning to a new
> versioning scheme.  The current version if Visual Studio 2015.  The next
> version is Visual Studio 15.  The link you posted was for the RTM of 2015,
> just over a year ago.  But 15 is still in Preview.  When 15 goes to RTM,
> then we can revisit the question of making 2015 the minimum required
> version.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 11:29 AM Piotr Padlewski <
> piotr.padlewski at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/news/vs2015-vs.aspx
>
>
>
> Is it time?
>
>
>
> 2016-03-31 12:03 GMT-07:00 Aaron Ballman via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>:
>
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:42 AM Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Not everyone can upgrade to the latest version of the toolchain, even
> >> if it has been released for a while. We did drop MSVC 2012 support
> >> early, but MSVC 2015 was in RC or RTM stages by that point, and we had
> >> some pretty big incentive to upgrade early (without function templates
> >> supporting default arguments, the AST matcher DSL made for really slow
> >> compiles of Clang itself, and resulted in a larger executable size
> >> among other things, IIRC).
> >
> >
> > I know you mentioned that one of the reasons we upgraded to 2013 was
> because
> > 2015 was in RC or RTM.  Ironically, the day after I posted this MS
> announced
> > Visual Studio 15 preview  (which is confusingly the version *after*
> Visual
> > Studio 2015).
>
> Hah, that is confusing!
>
> > In any case, it's not an RC, and it's certainly not an RTM,
> > but it is on the horizon.  So hopefully we can revisit this question
> when 15
> > is in RC / RTM
>
> I think that's a great time to revisit the question (transitioning
> sometimes takes a bit of time since we want to ask people with out of
> tree needs if they're ready before dropping support for major
> releases).
>
>
> ~Aaron
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160729/f9a989c1/attachment-0001.html>