LLVM and Clang 3.4 Are Out

An anonymous reader writes that the LLVM compiler framework and Clang C++ compiler hit 3.4 "With C++14 draft fully implemented in Clang and libc++. Read more in LLVM and Clang release notes." Also of note: "This is expected to be the last release of LLVM which compiles using a C++98 toolchain. We expect to start using some C++11 features in LLVM and other sub-projects starting after this release. That said, we are committed to supporting a reasonable set of modern C++ toolchains as the host compiler on all of the platforms. This will at least include Visual Studio 2012 on Windows, and Clang 3.1 or GCC 4.7.x on Mac and Linux. The final set of compilers (and the C++11 features they support) is not set in stone, but we wanted users of LLVM to have a heads up that the next release will involve a substantial change in the host toolchain requirements."

pretty quick on the C++14 support

[Trepidity]

Does that make it the first compiler with full draft C++14 support? GCC is making progress [gnu.org] but not there yet.

Re:pretty quick on the C++14 support

[serviscope_minor]

Yet another good readon for everyone to drop GCC and move on to the future. GCC is obsolete in pretty much every aspect,

Pure FUD. Who the hell modded this up. It's just plain trolling. GCC and LLVM are neck and neck, with GCC winning in the quality of the optimizer. I've also had compiler crashes much more recently with LLVM than with GCC, so it seems that GCC is also somewhat more battle hardened.

and the non-permissive license makes it hard to use for other purposes than simple command-line compilation compared to LLVM which can be integrated in many different products.

Only if you want to make your other tool non-free. Otherwise GCC works just fine.

Re:pretty quick on the C++14 support

[jandrese]

He's referring to integrating the compiler into your IDE. GCC makes this intentionally difficult, which is a big reason why there is no Visual Studio equivalent system that uses GCC. CLANG/LLVM is designed much more openly and should allow developers to really reach (and exceed) feature parity with Visual Studio.

Re:pretty quick on the C++14 support

[phantomfive]

And then shipped it together as a bundle with Xcode? The GPLv3 specifically prevents them doing that, and it was deliberately written that way.

Wait, how does GPLv3 prevent them from shipping it in a bundle with Xcode? I'm pretty sure that's allowed under GPL3, but Apple didn't like the patent clauses.

Re:pretty quick on the C++14 support

[Anonymous Coward]

As an Xcode user I would definitely appreciate it if they released Xcode under GPL. Can't tell you the number of times I sworn about bugs in Xcode, taken the time to file the bug report just to get it closed immediately because it was a duplicate of some existing bug that I'm not allowed to see and then wait months or even years for a fix. Yes this is so important for me that I would happily jump in and fix the bugs myself. I have absolutely no interest in Xcode remaining closed source. None.