> If you try to avoid the troubles of installing a zillion compilers > for the sake of installing poppler, what about switching to a super > lightweight pplib (currently available only inside LuaTeX sources)? > :) :) :)
I'm already using Emacs, I won't become an apostate :-) > You can manually specify the compiler being used to compile a > particular port. [...] Thanks for the explanations. Meanwhile, I bit the bullet and let macports install and compile whatever was necessary to get clang-6.0. My knowledge (and interest) is too limited to fiddle around with the intricate details. After almost a day of compiling I got it... >> OK. BTW, I see on >> >> https://libcxx.llvm.org/docs/UsingLibcxx.html#using-libc-with-gcc >> >> that gcc on MacOS actually *can* use libc++... > > This means that someone would need to spend a bit of time to try to > get it working correctly. For developers and porters it might be worth the trouble IMHO. > Apparently gcc8 fully supports C++11, but doesn't require a working > C++11 compliant compiler to build (bootstrap?) itself. Exactly. It only needs C++98. > (Maybe we should sometimes in fact allow using a bit more of gcc for > bootstrapping purposes.) At least for older platforms I second that – the clang people themselves write that you can use gcc for bootstrapping. However, it is not me who is going to work on this. >> And what about installing clang-7.0 instead of 5.0? Will `port' >> accept that for C++11 stuff as a default? > > Yes. The instructions were probably written when there was no newer > clang compiler available. I was told on this list some days ago that clang-7.0 is (still) too new; clang-6.0 is thus preferred. Werner