Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will it become
standard compiler?)
Roman Divacky
rdivacky at freebsd.org
Sat Jan 10 08:03:11 PST 2009
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 06:33:53AM -0800, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:
>
> > From: Roman Divacky
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 07:22:38PM -0800, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:
> > > FWIW,
> > >
> > > I had some informal talk with brooks@ about this at EuroBSDCon:
> > >
> > > - groff(1) needs a C++ compiler so clang is not (yet) an option? for the time
> > being we will have to live with GCC or llvm-gcc.
> >
> > I guess once the switch happens we are going to live for some with both
> > gcc and clang/llvm. I also guess that by the time the switch happens
> > clang is going to be full C++ capable :)
>
> I think it's more realistic to move to gcc-llvm first and then to clang: testing gcc-llvm helps?test the llvm capabilities?that clang will require to be a viable replacement. In any case, before doing such a thing an experimental run of the ports tree with?the alternative compiler?would prove very valuable to the developers.
I have already asked pav@ about this but I am waiting for clang to implement two
features (designated initializers and wchars)...
about the llvm-gcc... I dont know... it looks like a dead end to me...
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list