Mike Small <[email protected]> writes: > Richard Pieri <[email protected]> writes: >> Apple switched from GCC to LLVM/Clang four or five years ago >> specifically because the Free Software folks were dragging their heels >> on keeping GCC up to date with emerging C and C++ standards and 64-bit >> support. Yes, the switch is painful. Blame the FSF for that one, not Apple. > > This must have been a healthy kick in the butt for gcc, then, because > from what I hear gcc is in no way lagging llvm/clang (or any other C++ > compiler -- they're both way ahead of Microsoft) implementing C++11 and > C++14 features today. I've heard other theories for Apple's choice,
On the other hand, I don't know if you can mix new C++ features with new Objective-C (Objective-C++?) ones in gcc so well, which would be important to them. -- Mike Small [email protected] _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
