Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: LLVM Developers Ponder Using C++11 Features

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,647

    Default LLVM Developers Ponder Using C++11 Features

    Phoronix: LLVM Developers Ponder Using C++11 Features

    While C++11 is an ISO standard and the Clang C/C++ compiler front-end to LLVM has been supporting C++11, developers behind the LLVM compiler infrastructure are still deciding whether to allow C++11 language features within their code-base...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI3MDM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    5

    Thumbs down

    Chris Lattner and all of his LLVM whores should spend their time on better things such as dying or getting bent over and fucked by GCC.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,028

    Default On related note

    Does the Linux kernel make use of or allow C11?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Does the Linux kernel make use of or allow C11?
    Everything kernel-side is written in pure-C AFAIK. Userspace or shim layers can be C++, but linus and some of the other devs have a real problem with C++

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,877

    Default

    double post, delete

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Everything kernel-side is written in pure-C AFAIK. Userspace or shim layers can be C++, but linus and some of the other devs have a real problem with C++
    Yes, I know but I wasn't asking about C++11, I was asking about C11.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,877

    Default

    Whoops, sorry, misread. Saw "C" + "11" and my brain automatically dropped in the ++ lol


    Linus' thoughts on C11:

    Source: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-02/msg00042.html


    The problem I have with treating this as a C11 issue is that people
    aren't using C11 compilers, and won't for a long while.

    So quite frankly, it won't be reasonable for the kernel people to say
    "use a C11 version" for years to come.

    [...]

    And don't get me wrong. I don't think that means that C11 is *bad*.
    It's just that the kernel is very different from most other projects.
    We have to have those crazy architecture-specific header files and
    random synchronization macros etc anyway.

    C11 is not - I think - even meant to be geared towards the Linux
    kernel kind of crazy use. We really do some odd things, adding
    compiler features for them is mostly a mistake. asm() takes care of a
    lot of the oddities for us, it's not like all of them are about memory
    accesses or concurrency either.

    I do think that the threading issues in C11 are going to help us
    kernel people, because the more people think about issues with
    concurrency, they really *will* be hitting some of the issues we've
    been having. So it clearly forces clarification of just what the word
    "access" implies, for example, which is certainly not going to be bad
    for the kernel.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •