C++11 & The Long-Term Viability Of GCC Is Questioned

[-MacNuke-]

It can't even compile Linux, so it's nearly meaningless.

...because Linux uses many non-standard GNU/GCC-Extensions...

But Clang wants to implement the standards first. And here clang is far far ahead... C++11 for example.

[-MacNuke-]

It's not about wars, but about being sane. Nobody sane will work with BSD project, so MS and Apple can take his work.

Ah i see, thats why projects like WebKit, LLVM and PostgreSQL gets no code from companies back... oh wait...

[Pawlerson]

Ah i see, thats why projects like WebKit, LLVM and PostgreSQL gets no code from companies back... oh wait...

Compared to GPL projects it's nothing. However, I have to correct myself. People who are working on BSD for free aren't sane. Being paid and working on BSD projects makes a lot of sense though.

[Pawlerson]

...because Linux uses many non-standard GNU/GCC-Extensions...

But Clang wants to implement the standards first. And here clang is far far ahead... C++11 for example.

But this is not a Linux problem. When comes to Clang/llvm itself I think it's Linux that will benefit the most from it in the future. That's why I'm no longer against this project.

[XorEaxEax]

Ah i see, thats why projects like WebKit, LLVM and PostgreSQL gets no code from companies back... oh wait...

While I agree with your sentiment that having a BSD licence does not mean that you wont get source code contributions from companies, WebKit is mainly LGPL, like the project it forked from (KHTML).

[XorEaxEax]

...because Linux uses many non-standard GNU/GCC-Extensions...

But Clang wants to implement the standards first. And here clang is far far ahead... C++11 for example.

Really?

http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html

http://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html

I didn't count but I'd say just at a quick glance, your notion of 'far far ahead' seems like pure fantasy.

[-MacNuke-]

Really?
I didn't count but I'd say just at a quick glance, your notion of 'far far ahead' seems like pure fantasy.

Try to use it...

[-MacNuke-]

Compared to GPL projects it's nothing.

Do you have any numbers to share?

People who are working on BSD for free aren't sane.

Only because they give away their code "for free"? Why? It is their decision. I could call GPL users also not sane, because other people have to write the same stuff again and then you get two incompatible libraries. Happens alot nowadays. And maybe the "not GPL" project gets more users (maybe companies) then (maybe) your GPL project is dead because nobody uses it anymore. Then all your work was useless...

Sure, you have to choose your way but this does not mean that your way is the only right one...

[ryao]

While I agree with your sentiment that having a BSD licence does not mean that you wont get source code contributions from companies, WebKit is mainly LGPL, like the project it forked from (KHTML).

Webkit is in the process of being relicensed BSD. All code contributions are BSD-licensed and Apple's Webkit2 is entirely BSD-licensed.

[Ericg]

It can't even compile Linux, so it's nearly meaningless.

The reason it cant compile the kernel is because the kernel doesnt follow the standards. The kernel developers had to specifically ask the gcc developers to write non-standard extensions ontop of the compiler in order to get the speed / take the shortcuts they wanted. So don't be getting the impression that clang cannot compile it because its not stanards-compliant or anything like that.

For the record, a non-mainline clang CAN compile a non-mainline kernel. And by that i mean, both pieces had to be patched in some way, Clang is working on writing the necessary extensions needed so that it can eventually compile the kernel as is.