On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 12:08:21 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
>
> Should I split the compiler upgrades into a different change and integrate
>
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
As I
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
Now the
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:59:50 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
> I'd like to separate the version update discussions from C++17 specifics, so
> we can have focused discussions on the version choices. Of course, that's
> going to be informed by the possibility of C++17, but that's not the only
> factor.
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 12:43:29 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I think Kim's approach here -- to separate compiler upgrades from C++17 usage
> -- is the right way. Then we can discuss each part separately -- what version
> is suitable for each compiler, and then -- if or when we end up with all
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
I think
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 08:35:29 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> To be clear: I do not object to this PR. I would like to use C++17.
Maybe the advantages of C++17 have been discussed elsewhere, in which case all
we need is a link to that discussion on the Bug page. Maybe it's just that we
like to
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 17:11:34 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
> > Sure, you can always install a newer GCC than the system one, but it's
> > another thing that makes it harder for people to build OpenJDK. Having said
> > that, C++17 is nice to have.
>
> @theRealAph I am still just hearing
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 09:44:02 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> > Sure, you can always install a newer GCC than the system one, but it's
> > another thing that makes it harder for people to build OpenJDK. Having said
> > that, C++17 is nice to have.
>
> @theRealAph I am still just hearing
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 15:54:56 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> > I would like it if toolchain version bumps were discussed somewhere else
> > first, not in a PR. (And apologies if it was and I missed that discussion).
>
> Yes, it definitely was. I posted a separate [mail to
>
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 13:00:58 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
> I would like it if toolchain version bumps were discussed somewhere else
> first, not in a PR. (And apologies if it was and I missed that discussion).
Yes, it definitely was. I posted a separate [mail to
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
Just on
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 14:04:50 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Well, the only additional thing this PR does except raise the compiler
> version is to change the `--std` flag. It is a bit unclear what that means.
> For the JDK libraries, there are already code present that relies on C++17.
>
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 09:17:11 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Sure, you can always install a newer GCC than the system one, but it's
> another thing that makes it harder for people to build OpenJDK. Having said
> that, C++17 is nice to have.
@theRealAph I am still just hearing hand-waving "perhaps
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 11:19:03 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> We have been stuck on a very old gcc for a long time, due to various reasons.
> Partly because old gcc versions were not as terrible as old versions of
> cl.exe, and partly to support odd linux platforms where newer gcc versions
>
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 12:08:21 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
>
> Should I split the compiler upgrades into a different change and integrate
>
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
Nobody
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
Well,
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
Should
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:39:43 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> For me, there is a huge question on portable JDK builds, which are usually
> built with the lowest GCC toolchain possible to avoid GLIBC
> incompatibilities. I am pretty sure currently built portable builds are _not_
> riding as high
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
For me,
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
We have
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 07:49:17 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> We at SAP use and document xlC 17.1.1.4 for jdk22 (use the same for jdk23)
> https://wiki.openjdk.org/display/Build/Supported+Build+Platforms
>
> version 17.1.1.4 is already clang15 (at least that's what the compiler output
> is
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 06:32:34 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
> > Thanks! We may switch to clang 14 on MacOS at some point of time, but it's
> > better to have that disentangled. Some people build JDK 11 and 23 on the
> > same machine and that is easier if they don't have to switch Xcode.
>
> I think
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 14:28:20 GMT, Martin Doerr wrote:
> Thanks! We may switch to clang 14 on MacOS at some point of time, but it's
> better to have that disentangled. Some people build JDK 11 and 23 on the same
> machine and that is easier if they don't have to switch Xcode.
I think the
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 13:23:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
Thanks!
> Compile the JDK as C++17, enabling the use of all C++17 language features
Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Require clang 13 in toolchain.m4
-
Changes:
- all:
27 matches
Mail list logo
