Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
On 11-06-21 12:11 PM, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
(how big a subset of gcc is llvm/clang able to handle ? is there a way
to reasonably substitute it for gcc in a compilation script, which
means, can it be made to understand most of the gcc command line
options ?)
Clang is largely compatible with most gcc command line options, although
I suspect a lot of the funky -f flags are not supported; clang is also
now able to compile mozilla-central, and even boost and qt, so it's
probably pretty usable.
One of the design goals for clang is to be a drop-in replacement for
gcc. clang is not finished yet (it's a software project after all!) but
for almost any project, simply switching CC and CXX to point to clang
and clang++ binaries is enough. If you do find issues with it, please
report them to the LLVM project (which is pretty responsive on bug
reports).
OK, so I'll test. I'm not sure I'll regret GCC so much actually.
GCC 4.5 was really hard to compile on my platform (OpenPkg is useful to
solve that, but itself not that easy to get going initially), and the
compilation with the dehydra plug-in was painfully slow (a few files are
really large).
As of now, I'm impressed. Apparently the generic linux package means I
don't even have to recompile llvm.
_______________________________________________
dev-static-analysis mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-static-analysis
