[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC: Changing clang defaults for 3.1
From: |
Sebastian Reitenbach |
Subject: |
Re: RFC: Changing clang defaults for 3.1 |
Date: |
Fri, 06 Apr 2012 18:28:25 +0200 |
User-agent: |
SOGoMail 1.3.14 |
On Friday, April 6, 2012 12:37 CEST, David Chisnall
<theraven@theravensnest.org> wrote:
> On 6 Apr 2012, at 07:09, Sebastian Reitenbach wrote:
>
> > Does gnustep-make handle all those new clang parameters? If not, I'd prefer
> > to keep everything as is for OpenBSD.
>
> I believe GNUstep Make should work fine if you specify the extra OBJCFLAGS
> when configuring it (it doesn't need to know what they mean, it will just
> pass them to the compiler).
>
> I've tested configure of make and base with the non-fragile ABI as the
> default, and it all appeared to work. I'd especially like to make the new
> dispatch mechanism the default for x86[-64] and ARM on any platforms where
> the GNUstep runtime is going to be standard, because this give a 10% size
> reduction in base and much faster message sends.
>
> > I still have one or two ports in the tree that don't work with
> > non-fragile-abi.
>
> Is it possible to fix them? They will also find it difficult to work with
> modern OS X.
They probably can be fixed ;)
If I don't find out how to do that, I'll ask back on discuss@
I still have not yet made clang the default compiler for the ports, so after
rethinking, I think you should go ahead. If I really run into problems, which I
hope not, I'll have to deal with it later, or disable features, using the
OBJCFLAGS.
cheers,
Sebastian
>
> David