Hi, > That seems to apply more to using "more recent LLVM/Clang" on 10.8 and > earlier (is clang-3.3 "more recent" or "older"?) than on using recent gcc > versions on 10.9 ... but it looks like the real bottleneck is not the > copyright flavour but binary (in)compatibility between regular (old?) C++ > and C++11. I can't remember having looked at how much of C++11 GCC supports, > but if it does (or is planned), wouldn't its libc++ follow?
Yes, the problem is that you can't have both libstdc++ (any version) and libc++ in a single address space. That means whenever you compile C++ code you have to choose one of them and use that and only that. If you're trying to write C++11 code on OS X that means you'll *have* to use libc++. That also means that MacPorts has decided to follow Apple's choice of using libc++ as default starting with 10.9. So if you're writing C++ code for OS X, you'll have to use clang++ -stdlib=libc++ as soon as you link against a single other C++ library or export a C++ interface. Btw, on getting GCC use your Core i7 capabilities: That will probably not happen either, because the GNU as shipped by Apple doesn't support AVX instructions – clang is currently the only compiler able to use AVX instructions on OS X. So in general, GCC is pretty much dead on newer versions of OS X and you should really have very very very good reasons to attempt to use anything but clang. -- Clemens Lang _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
