2013/12/27 niXman i.nix...@autistici.org
Óscar Fuentes 2013-12-25 00:51:
In my projects, programs compiled with Clang (since 3.2) run about 5%
faster than with g++ (4.8.1). That's on Linux x86_64.
My tests indicate the opposite.
Diagnostics are much better than any other C++ compiler,
@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Mingw-w64-public] clang on Windows
--
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects
@lists.sourceforge.net
mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
Reply-To: mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Mingw-w64-public] clang on Windows
--
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your
Ruben Van Boxem 2013-12-27 16:54:
I was busy setting up some new build scripts, and hoped to
get a new Clang build out with a newer GCC's libstdc++, but haven't
finished that little project yet. Wish me luck on that :-)
Why yet another build scripts? Our scripts can build CLang.
Maybe with our
-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
Reply-To: mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Mingw-w64-public] clang on Windows
--
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most
Hello Kai,
Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com writes:
Sounds interesting. But honestly, llvm (Clang) is for Windows right
now pretty unusable. Major basic features of compiler are missing.
LLVM is one thing and Clang another. LLVM works fine on Windows. Lacks
some features compared to *nix,
Óscar Fuentes 2013-12-25 00:51:
In my projects, programs compiled with Clang (since 3.2) run about 5%
faster than with g++ (4.8.1). That's on Linux x86_64.
My tests indicate the opposite.
Diagnostics are much better than any other C++ compiler,
What are you talking?
Standards compliance is
And if I compile it with MinGW then it uses MinGW's toolchain, no? Does
Clang not have it's own toolchain (specifically linker)?
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Ivan Garramona
heavenandhell...@gmail.comwrote:
You have to compile Clang with MinGW, otherwise Clang will use VS's
toolchain.
Baruch Burstein bmburst...@gmail.com
writes:
And if I compile it with MinGW then it uses MinGW's toolchain, no?
Correct.
Does Clang not have it's own toolchain (specifically linker)?
They are creating one ( http://lld.llvm.org ) but it is not
production-ready yet.
llvm-link is for
I think Clang svn uses its integrated assembler. But it still needs GCC for
linking though.
2013/12/24 Óscar Fuentes o...@wanadoo.es
Baruch Burstein bmburst...@gmail.com
writes:
And if I compile it with MinGW then it uses MinGW's toolchain, no?
Correct.
Does Clang not have it's own
Ivan Garramona
heavenandhell...@gmail.com writes:
I think Clang svn uses its integrated assembler.
IIRC Clang uses the integrated assembler since a few releases ago.
But it still needs GCC for linking though.
On Windows, Clang needs MinGW or VS for linking and for the runtime
libraries and
24 дек. 2013 г., в 23:13, Óscar Fuentes o...@wanadoo.es написал(а):
Ivan Garramona
heavenandhell...@gmail.com writes:
I think Clang svn uses its integrated assembler.
IIRC Clang uses the integrated assembler since a few releases ago.
But it still needs GCC for linking though.
On
Alexpux alex...@gmail.com writes:
My 50 cents to this topic. There are some interesting discussion about
porting clang to self-hosting on windows
http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Porting-libcxxabi-Unwind-to-Windows-MingW-32-bit-td4035390.html
AFAIK Clang could use (actually uses?)
25 дек. 2013 г., в 0:08, Óscar Fuentes o...@wanadoo.es написал(а):
Alexpux alex...@gmail.com writes:
My 50 cents to this topic. There are some interesting discussion about
porting clang to self-hosting on windows
2013/12/24 Óscar Fuentes o...@wanadoo.es
Ivan Garramona
heavenandhell...@gmail.com writes:
I think Clang svn uses its integrated assembler.
IIRC Clang uses the integrated assembler since a few releases ago.
But it still needs GCC for linking though.
On Windows, Clang needs MinGW or VS
Ivan Garramona 2013-12-25 00:19:
I'm even planning to move my projects from the buggy VC++ 2013
to Clang.
Why Clang? Why not GCC/MinGW-W64?
As far as I know, Clang optimizes much worse than GCC. Small plus Clang
in that it compiles a little bit faster than GCC.
I really do not understand the
Ivan Garramona
heavenandhell...@gmail.com writes:
Clang+MinGW-w64 is working pretty well for me.
For me the inability of creating C++ DLLs (exporting classes and
template instantiations) is a show stopper. I had problems with some
Boost libraries (boost::thread, IIRC) but that could be fixable.
You have to compile Clang with MinGW, otherwise Clang will use VS's
toolchain.
2013/12/23 Baruch Burstein bmburst...@gmail.com
I apologize if this is not the right place for this. If so, letme know and
I will not post more questions about clang to here.
This question is really targeted
18 matches
Mail list logo
