Officially, the latest two major versions- so MSVC 2012 and 2013. The main issue I'd see here is that all of those features are relatively untested- for example, in VS 14 CTP3 they had to introduce a new error to explicitly break all the cases where the compiler silently did totally the wrong thing. The ones that were included in VS2012 CTP are not quite as bad. But the reality of using VS2013 is not that all of these features will suddenly be available to use- there's a lot of compiler issues that would need to be worked around, including some silently-generates-totally-the-wrong-code bugs. They can also report totally incorrect errors- e.g. reporting errors that have nothing to do with the real error, in totally the wrong location, or both.
Seeing the feature list seems compelling, but MSVC's actual support is often still below the standard you can find in GCC or Clang, even in officially supported features. There's a price to be paid not just in terms of breaking users who are still VS2012-dependent, but also in terms of debugging VS2013-only bugs. Personally, I think that it's worth upping the minimum requirement whenever you're not breaking a substantial portion of your userbase. All I'm saying is, the experience of many of us using VS2013 is that that feature list is a little ... optimistic. Upgrading on that basis alone may well yield undesirable results. Perhaps it would be better to consider a fork, where the new features are employed, and then if it doesn't introduce new bugs, it could be merged. This would also give more time for people to report in with a VS2012 dependency. On 22 August 2014 17:58, Chris Bieneman <be...@apple.com> wrote: > > On Aug 22, 2014, at 9:53 AM, Daniel Dilts <dilts...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Chris Bieneman <be...@apple.com> wrote: > >> Starting a new thread to loop in cfe-dev and lldb-dev. For those not >> following along there has been a thread on llvm-dev about moving the >> minimum required Visual Studio version to 2013. The motivating reason is >> this will allow us to take advantage of a bunch of C++11 features that are >> not supported by MSVC 2012. >> > > Is there an existing policy on how supported compiler versions are > selected? > > > There was a discussion last year ( > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-October/066847.html) WRT > allowing LLVM to use C++11 features which established a precedent of > supporting compilers released back for two years, with a special caveat for > Windows. > > -Chris > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-dev mailing list > cfe-...@cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev > >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
