[llvm-dev] Using C++14 code in LLVM

[Zachary Turner via llvm-dev]

It's documented here

http://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 4:00 AM C Bergström <cbergstrom at pathscale.com> wrote:

> I see a lot of people talking about c++14 and *maybe* clang-N.N.N will
> support it, but is there any tests which can be used to
> actually/tangibly verify this?
>
> Is there tests for the features being proposed to take advantage of?
> It would be prudent to ensure there's tests available to verify on
> buildbots before any decision to switch is made.
>
> Break this into steps and it becomes a plan instead of just tossing
> opinions around.
>
> From what I read so far - I'd speculate that only old Linux and NetBSD
> will have an issue with the bump. Worst case those platforms need an
> extra step to bootstrap, but should that hold everything back? Either
> newer clang is good enough to replace the older version or it's not.
> However, testing as a pre-cursor and getting facts is important.
>
> #1 Tests for the features
> #2 Bug tracker to identify any regressions blocking updating
> #3 Buildbots to verify
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Dimitry Andric via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > I wasn't able to find that information on the distrowatch page you
> linked, but I will assume that it is talking about the available ports,
> e.g. packages external to the FreeBSD base system.  In the FreeBSD ports
> collection, we have clang 3.3 through 3.9 available, and a 4.0 trunk
> snapshot as of 2016-08-24.
> >
> > On the other hand, the base system is a little different, in the sense
> that we use clang to bootstrap the whole system, and use the FreeBSD build
> system instead of llvm/clang's native build system.  Also, we don't have
> all the additional tools like llc, opt, and so on, by default.
> >
> > FreeBSD 10.3 currently has clang 3.4.1, with libc++ from around that
> time, plus a bunch of patches.  I think it will be able to do most of
> C++14, except maybe some corner cases.
> >
> > FreeBSD 11.0 (which is going to ship any day now) has clang 3.8.0, with
> libc++ 3.8.0.
> >
> > I'm currently working on importing clang 3.9.0 into FreeBSD 12 (the
> development version) together with libc++ 3.9.0, compiler-rt 3.9.0 and so
> on.  These will hopefully land before the end of this month.  After about a
> month, I will merge it all into FreeBSD 11, so it will end up in FreeBSD
> 11.1.
> >
> > -Dimitry
> >
> >> On 03 Oct 2016, at 05:43, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> For anyone still on gcc 4.2.1, then I think this entire discussion is
> kind of irrelevant, because they are already having to build a new
> toolchain to compile LLVM, since the minimum is currently 4.7.  So for
> those people, I would imagine 4.7 vs. 4.9 makes no difference?
> >>
> >> Maybe I'm misunderstanding the table of the distrowatch page, but if
> FreeBSD 11 has clang 3.8 as you say, why does distrowatch say FreeBSD 10
> and 11 have clang 3.9?
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 7:10 PM Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >> On 10/2/2016 6:09 PM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev wrote:
> >> > The BSDs don't seem as much of an issue.  FreeBSD 10 and 11 both have
> >> > LLVM 3.9 and GCC 4.9.  NetBSD 6.1.5 and 7.0 both have GCC 5.3 and LLVM
> >> > 3.8.  Open BSD has a very old GCC, but distrowatch claims that it also
> >> > has LLVM 3.8.
> >>
> >> FreeBSD 11 has clang 3.8.0.  There is gcc in the /usr/src/contrib, but
> >> that's 4.2.1.  There are still platforms that FreeBSD supports that have
> >> not finished moving to clang (from gcc 4.2.1).
> >>
> >> -Krzysztof
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20161003/b1679d18/attachment-0001.html>