[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: gcc and C++0x on Mac OS X
From: |
John Swensen |
Subject: |
Re: gcc and C++0x on Mac OS X |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:52:16 -0400 |
On Oct 26, 2010, at 10:47 AM, John Swensen wrote:
>
> On Oct 26, 2010, at 10:38 AM, Jordi GutiƩrrez Hermoso wrote:
>>
>> I'm a little worried about this. Apple is quite clearly trying to move
>> away from gcc. They stopped using gcc when it became GPLv3 and are
>> pouring all of their efforts in clang instead. I would like to be able
>> to start using C++0x constructs in Octave, but this is going to be
>> impossible with gcc on Mac OS X if you can't update it.
>>
>> Is this an actual concern, or am I worried over nothing? How backwards
>> compatible should Octave's code remain? C++0x will mostly likely be
>> finalised by 2012, by the estimates I've seen, and gcc already
>> implements much of it. By contrast, clang is way behind. Many C++0x
>> features could clean up Octave code. Will we be able to use them?
>>
>> - Jordi G. H.
>
> My recent compilations have all been using the GCC 4.4.5 as provide by
> MacPorts. The only dependency I have to compile on my own is FLTK, as the
> NO_X11 variant for MacPorts doesn't provide a OpenGL capable compilation of
> FLTK. MacPorts also provides GCC 4.5.1 and GCC 4.6 (I'm not sure when all
> the C++0x feature became available), but I haven't compiled Octave with
> either one of them.
>
> On the other hand, getting Octave to compile with clang and llvm *may have*
> some advantages. I am not a compiler expert by any stretch of anyone's
> imagination, but earlier discussion on the mailing list indicated that LLVM
> may provide the shortest path to JIT compilation via a transformation of the
> Octave Parser tree into an LLVM compatible format. Has anyone successfully
> compiled even the most recent sources with clang/clang++/llvm? Does anyone
> know how the GCC frontend for LLVM works? Would it still provide the JIT
> possibilities without using clang/clang++?
>
> John Swensen
>
Also, to amend my previous email, as of GCC 4.5 there is a plugin system and
what used to be called the llvm-gcc is now a plugin called DragonEgg. So I
guess this kindof also answered my earlier question about whether some of the
niceties of an LLVM backend would be available for JIT with GCC as a frontend.
John