Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: LLVM's Clang Compiler Nearly C++11 Feature Complete

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,629

    Default LLVM's Clang Compiler Nearly C++11 Feature Complete

    Phoronix: LLVM's Clang Compiler Nearly C++11 Feature Complete

    LLVM's Clang C/C++ compiler front-end is nearing feature completion for supporting C++11, the latest C++ ISO standard...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTMwOTU

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    53

    Default

    That's nice but GCC is doing a much better job at C++11 (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/cxx0x_status.html)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stikonas View Post
    That's nice but GCC is doing a much better job at C++11 (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/cxx0x_status.html)
    Well, looks like they are both almost finished in their next versions. Too bad clang haven't implemented inherited constructors yet though. It is one the features I am really looking forward to using.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stikonas View Post
    That's nice but GCC is doing a much better job at C++11 (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/cxx0x_status.html)
    Three "No" and two "N/A" vs two "No". I'd say it's neck and neck, with GCC having a slight lead. Honestly, they're both almost done. Now it's just up to who <strike>can do</strike> does a better job at what is done.
    Last edited by Nobu; 02-22-2013 at 07:41 PM.

  5. #5

    Default

    Clang/LLVM is kicking so much ass.

    FreeBSD and Apple have completely dumped the crap GNU GCC compiler leaving only Linux as the last platform still stuck with GCC.

    Just look at the amazing explosion in tools and compiler/language tools and innovation Clang/LLVM have enabled shows just what a massive cancer the GPL and it's shit ideology crippled open source compiler development.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    482

    Default

    That doesnt sound wrong...for GCC or LLVM/Clang. Would you describe them as "a tumour or growth that is malignant (can spread)"?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    When it comes to C++11 concurrency functionality, the latest SVN code also handles sequence points.
    Are you implying that previous Clang releases didn't handle sequence points, a fundamental concept in C since its inception? C++11 added threading support to the C++11 spec rather than leaving them as implementation details and removed the term "sequence point" in favor of clearer terminology and some refinements to ensure well-defined behavior with the new features, but your summary (based, I'm assuming, off of a naive reading or the Clang C++11 page) makes it sound like they just added sequence points to the compiler. Which is ludicrous, it would have never functioned properly for even many simple programs without them. The "sequence points" item on the Clang/GCC C++11 pages refer to the proposal for redefining and clarifying how expression sequencing works with threads, not adding sequence points to the language.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeardedGNUFreak View Post
    Clang/LLVM is kicking so much ass.

    FreeBSD and Apple have completely dumped the crap GNU GCC compiler leaving only Linux as the last platform still stuck with GCC.

    Just look at the amazing explosion in tools and compiler/language tools and innovation Clang/LLVM have enabled shows just what a massive cancer the GPL and it's shit ideology crippled open source compiler development.
    I have to agree with your position on the GPL, the ideology has trampled software freedom. While the GPL might have had good intentions it has turned into an evil worst than proprietary software.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
    I have to agree with your position on the GPL, the ideology has trampled software freedom. While the GPL might have had good intentions it has turned into an evil worst than proprietary software.
    Okay, I will bite. Name one, just one example of something that has happened in the real world that would make what you just said make any sense?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeardedGNUFreak View Post
    Clang/LLVM is kicking so much ass.

    FreeBSD and Apple have completely dumped the crap GNU GCC compiler leaving only Linux as the last platform still stuck with GCC.

    Just look at the amazing explosion in tools and compiler/language tools and innovation Clang/LLVM have enabled shows just what a massive cancer the GPL and it's shit ideology crippled open source compiler development.

    You can understand that many extensions for LLVM are under GPL (so LLVM will never be complete) right? You can understand that the next GCC will be like LLVM, binary compatible and under GPL right? I think you can also understand that any one that codes for free does that under GPL, because people they don't want to be used for money and they want something back from there code. How is it right BSD programmers (pros) to want something back and simple people (hobbyists) they don't have the same right? As i see it, BSD is to take other people's work for your self.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •