Hello Kai,
Kai Tietz writes:
> Sounds interesting. But honestly, llvm (Clang) is for Windows right
> now pretty unusable. Major basic features of compiler are missing.
LLVM is one thing and Clang another. LLVM works fine on Windows. Lacks
some features compared to *nix, but it is useful since
2013/12/27 Ruben Van Boxem :
> 2013/12/27
>
>> Ruben,
>>
>> Thanks. I was wating for your comments. I've been experimentig with clang
>> from the latest toolchain you released. I've compiled C code with good
>> results. Most of the time, clang generated exes are smaller than gcc's. I
>> also find
Thanks Adrian. I downloaded the bundled then overwrote the two files specified
with the versions you created. Changed to the proper directory, but wget which
is ran from the script received a 404 file not found error. Here 's the output:
" $ ./msys-install.sh i686t
Installing win-builds for
Ruben Van Boxem 2013-12-27 16:54:
> I was busy setting up some new build scripts, and hoped to
> get a new Clang build out with a newer GCC's libstdc++, but haven't
> finished that little project yet. Wish me luck on that :-)
Why yet another build scripts? Our scripts can build CLang.
Maybe with o
2013/12/27
> Ruben,
>
> Thanks. I was wating for your comments. I've been experimentig with clang
> from the latest toolchain you released. I've compiled C code with good
> results. Most of the time, clang generated exes are smaller than gcc's. I
> also find clang diagnostic's more helpful.
>
> L
Ruben,
Thanks. I was wating for your comments. I've been experimentig with clang from
the latest toolchain you released. I've compiled C code with good results. Most
of the time, clang generated exes are smaller than gcc's. I also find clang
diagnostic's more helpful.
Let's use both gcc and cl
2013/12/27 niXman
> Óscar Fuentes 2013-12-25 00:51:
> > In my projects, programs compiled with Clang (since 3.2) run about 5%
> > faster than with g++ (4.8.1). That's on Linux x86_64.
> My tests indicate the opposite.
>
> > Diagnostics are much better than any other C++ compiler,
> What are you t
