On 06/04/2010 03:17 PM, "C. Bergström" wrote:
Martin Sebor wrote:
...
The biggest but possibly the only reason that occurs to me
is portability. The target platform of libc++ is gcc/clang
on Apple OS X. stdcxx on the other hand has been ported to
dozens of compilers and operating systems and versions,
and is easily portable to new ones (check out the nightly
test matrix: http://stdcxx.apache.org/builds/4.2.x/).
Maybe integrate with the suse build service to catch platforms that
aren't in the test matrix currently.. I see SLE11 missing from the
matrix and I know that's really important for us and some others..
FreeBSD 8 is broken.. etc
Also is it really nightly?
"Generated Thu Aug 27 15:00:33 UTC 2009 ..."
It was (or in response to a commit) until Rogue Wave stopped
running the builds a few months ago. We haven't yet found a
replacement infrastructure.
Martin
If you don't care about portability to this extent or if
your target platform is close to that of libc++ then going
with it is likely to be more economical than starting from
scratch with stdcxx.
Portability is interesting to us, but we're also very much interested in
performance. So previous to the upcoming release we only supported
Linux, but now we're looking to add OpenSolaris, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Mac
and possibly other platforms as we have time to bring them up to
production levels.
I really see three sweet spots for this
#1 Linux - just a big market
#2 FreeBSD - really wants to move towards more permissive licensed software
#3 NetBSD - really cares about license and portability
I think if we can deliver the open source version of our compiler on
these three platforms and show performance gains over gcc we'll have a
real case for getting some extra help. (Maybe I'm crazy and the STL +
runtime isn't that interesting)
If there are any contractors or people looking for full/part time work
to help out with this ping me off list and lets discuss options.
Thanks!
./Christopher
community discussion
#pathscale - irc.freenode.net
