s...@rogue-research.com wrote: > Yeah, it's confusing... :( > > > http://open.cdash.org/testDetails.php?test=201937899&build=2986383 > > > > (MacOS 10.7) > > > > The CXX compiler identification is Clang 4.0.0 > > > > I do not believe that. > > Apple has their own fork/branch of clang which they use in Xcode. AFAICT > it's not so different from the open source one, it's probably more to do > with them not wanting to tie Xcode's release schedule to clang's. Anyway, > very confusingly, Apple uses their own version numbering scheme. So > that's "Apple clang 4.0". It comes with whatever version of Xcode that > machine's running (4.4 I think?).
Wow, this idea is so awesome, they probably should file a patent for it. So
any version checking like I do in the CXXFeatures test ("I have compiler
version X, the supported features should be ...") is entirely mood for Clang.
Great.
> > Especially as
> >
> > http://open.cdash.org/testDetails.php?test=201937829&build=2986379
> >
> > (MacOS 10.8)
> >
> > shows 3.4.0. But since even 3.4 does not seem to be released I wonder
> > what's
> > going on there?
>
> That one is the open source clang, which I build from svn. It's not from
> Xcode. It's my 'bleeding edge' build machine. clang is always getting
> stricter and getting new warnings, so this help us fix them before a
> CMake/VTK/ITK release.
Fine. Why don't they name it 3.3.99 then? ;)
Eike
--
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
