GCC 11 Will Likely Support Using LLVM's libc++

[carewolf]

The only criteria that is important to me is output executable performance. I did search for benchmark showing difference between gcc and clang yesterday and the only benchmark that I did find was only showing a very marginal difference giving a very small lead to gcc exec output. I'm currently using gcc to build C++ code. Unless I'm shown that LLVM libc++ is significantly faster than gcc own libs, I won't even bother to consider making the switch...

Not to mention that libc++ is the most primitive of the standard libraries, not even having completed c++17.

[carewolf]

GCC doesn't support building with libc++ period. That's the whole point of the article. Dumbass.

No the point was switching at runtime, not at compile time.

[Mangix]

Not to mention that libc++ is the most primitive of the standard libraries, not even having completed c++17.

Try uClibc++.

That's a laughable statement.

[carewolf]

Try uClibc++.

That's a laughable statement.

Of the ones that ship with compilers..

[pal666]

GCC doesn't support building with libc++ period

where did i imply the opposite,

Dumbass.

?

[pal666]

Operating Systems: Microsoft (Windows), Google(Android) , Apple(macos+iOS), BSD-OSs ....etc
Hardware Manufacturers: Intel (Desktop+Server), AMD(Desktop+Server+Gaming), ARM(Mobile), IBM(Server), Nvidia(Desktop), Sony(Gaming)...etc
and don't forget RedHat is owned now by IBM.

yes, all of them are supporting gcc, so what was you point again?

[Alliancemd]

I've found GCC's "libstdc++" to be very buggy(ex: "std::condition_variable::wait_for" using "system_clock" instead of "steady_clock" as required by the standard, thus timing out when there are NTP time adjustments - and this bug was known and was there until GCC 9...) and have the slowest implementations of the containers(ex: unordered_map).
This is good news, people should definitely consider using "libc++", it is significantly and I mean Significantly higher quality.