search for: msvc

...build process and creates smaller >>> executables. Anyways, it they want all targets, it is simply a matter of >>> passing -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=all on the cmake command line. >> >> I don't see any reason why that argument applies to people building >> with MSVC, but not people on other platforms. > > Another reason is that by limiting the build to X86, there is a > smaller probability of a build failure with a toolset which is not > checked on a day-by-day basis, as msvc is. MSVC *is* continuously checked; see http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/b...

On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Matthieu M. <matthieu.monrocq at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > Using the Apache Wiki [1] I summed up what can be used simultaneously by gcc, > MSVC and clang. > > I mostly considered only the latest versions of the proposals where there were > several, where not there is a link to a note at the bottom. Furthermore I did > not scourge through 3 bug databases and I implicitly trusted the wiki page. > > > I drew up a list of...

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Óscar Fuentes<ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes: > >> MSVC *is* continuously checked; see >> http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/builders/clang-i686-xp-msvc9.  Anyone >> who breaks the MSVC build will get a nastygram from buildbot. > > This is new news for me. > > If the developer who broke the msvc build receives a nastygram, would he &...

...ed to a potential problem with enabling >> C++ language features. (Not having a range type doesn't make >> range-based for loops fail to compile on some platform, it just makes >> them slightly less useful.) > > One other specific problem with this is that (I'm told) MSVC 2010 doesn't support range-based for loops. I don't think it is reasonable to require windows users to be on MSVC 2012. :-( I suspect you're right about that, but I'd appreciate if some MSVC users would speak up here. We shouldn't hold back on using range-based for loops if a...

Hello all, Using the Apache Wiki [1] I summed up what can be used simultaneously by gcc, MSVC and clang. I mostly considered only the latest versions of the proposals where there were several, where not there is a link to a note at the bottom. Furthermore I did not scourge through 3 bug databases and I implicitly trusted the wiki page. I drew up a list of profiles, listing the base capab...

...rting a new thread to loop in cfe-dev and lldb-dev. For those not following along there has been a thread on llvm-dev about moving the minimum required Visual Studio version to 2013. The motivating reason is this will allow us to take advantage of a bunch of C++11 features that are not supported by MSVC 2012. > > Is there an existing policy on how supported compiler versions are selected? There was a discussion last year (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-October/066847.html <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-October/066847.html>) WRT allowing LLVM to use...

...rote: > I would like to know how many years I have to wait before we can ditch > this stuff. I intend to do some testing on platforms I have available > today and roll a second pre-release after my testing. Talking about ditching, there are still .dsp files in the repository, these are MSVC 6 files. I haven't seen anyone on the list testing the source with that version (MSVC 2005 was the first version to have a free express version so this one hasn't) so these are probably broken as well. MSVC 6 was released in 1998 and was succeeded by MSVC .NET in 2002, so maybe these fi...

Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes: > MSVC *is* continuously checked; see > http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/builders/clang-i686-xp-msvc9. Anyone > who breaks the MSVC build will get a nastygram from buildbot. This is new news for me. If the developer who broke the msvc build receives a nastygram, would he urged to fix it when he has...

...Jan 11, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl at getdesigned.at> wrote: > > On 11.01.2013, at 20:08, Eli Bendersky wrote: > >>>> I suppose this tradeoff can be evaluated by looking at the delta >>>> between 4.5 and 4.6 which is actually supported by MSVC 2010 and Clang >>>> 3.1 >>> >>> Makes perfect sense to me. >>> >>> -Chris >> >> According to http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html, these features >> are available from 4.6 (language features only): >> >> - Null pointer...

...un, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:57 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Matthieu M. <matthieu.monrocq at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> Using the Apache Wiki [1] I summed up what can be used simultaneously by gcc, >> MSVC and clang. >> >> I mostly considered only the latest versions of the proposals where there were >> several, where not there is a link to a note at the bottom. Furthermore I did >> not scourge through 3 bug databases and I implicitly trusted the wiki page. >> >> &...

...rting a new thread to loop in cfe-dev and lldb-dev. For those not following along there has been a thread on llvm-dev about moving the minimum required Visual Studio version to 2013. The motivating reason is this will allow us to take advantage of a bunch of C++11 features that are not supported by MSVC 2012. According to MSDN (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh567368.aspx) the list is: * Non-static data member initializers * Variadic templates * Initializer lists * Default template arguments for function templates * Expression SFINAE * Alias templates * Delegating constructors * Explicit...

Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> writes: >> And here there is no "Windows ABI" here at all. Because every compiler >> (MSVC, gcc / clang, Borland) does its own stuff. This is why I said >> that the proposal naming is confusing. >> > > I don't know anything about Borland, and I don't think that matters. But I > think that the Windows ABI is, and really must be, the ABI followed by the > sy...

...stable enough at least to ship Chromium. In the past, we've supported the latest two major versions of Visual Studio unless there is a strong use case for dropping the oldest version. I don't believe any such use case has been brought up yet, so I would imagine we will continue to support MSVC 2013 until the next major release. > Language wise, 2015 comes with a lot of new C++ features. The most > interesting to people will probably be template aliases, C++11 constexpr, > the thread_local keyword, and thread-safe function local statics (finally). > A complete list of new C+...

>> One other specific problem with this is that (I'm told) MSVC 2010 doesn't support range-based for loops. I don't think it is reasonable to require windows users to be on MSVC 2012. :-( > I suspect you're right about that, but I'd appreciate if some MSVC > users would speak up here. We shouldn't hold back on using range-based >...

...keyword, and thread-safe function local statics (finally). A complete list of new C++ language support can be found here <https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh409293.aspx>. As far as the different LLVM subprojects are concerned, LLDB was always going to be the hardest get working with MSVC 2015 due to the fact that it embeds python as an extension module, but as the LLDB maintainer for Windows I tackled this early and I can say that it's now done and we have completely transitioned to MSVC 2015 already in LLDB. Since we are only supporting 2015 in LLDB moving forward, I have a s...

I’d like to propose raising the minimum required compiler for the LLVM & Clang trunks for Visual Studio to MSVC 2013. Doing this will allow us to take advantage of a bunch of C++11 features that are not supported by MSVC 2012. According to MSDN (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh567368.aspx) the list is: * Non-static data member initializers * Variadic templates * Initializer lists * Default templa...

I verified the patch and it compiles all the targets, both in Debug and Release modes. If there is no someone else to keep the MSVC projects files updated, I will try from time to time to update them and to add the new targets. Maybe a note must be put in "docs/GettingStartedVS.html" at the Requirements section that llvm needs now MSVC (Express) 2008 to compile. Razvan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chr...

...nd line is followed by -lbar. I'd think that's not too bad or >>> arguably more straightforward semantics than autolinking everything all at >>> once at the end. >>> >> >> So I played around with this idea a bit. Some background info: >> >> MSVC searches libraries added via "comment lib" pragmas last, after >> searching all of the libraries specified on the command line; however, >> symbols that are unresolved when bringing in an object file from a library >> are searched for in that library first ( >> htt...

I’m trying to figure out how to build compiler-rt 3.5.0 with Visual Studio 2013. In an autotools build or cmake on Linux, I believe putting the compiler-rt sources under llvm/projects is enough to build them automatically. Do I need to do anything specific to get the same with MSVC? I've tried setting -DLLVM_BUILD_EXTERNAL_COMPILER_RT either ON or OFF, but can't find any evidence of compiler-rt getting built. If I build compiler-rt separately, pointing it to an installed LLVM build with -DLLVM_CONFIG_PATH, the only thing that ends up in the install result is the s...

...to ship Chromium. > > In the past, we've supported the latest two major versions of Visual > Studio unless there is a strong use case for dropping the oldest > version. I don't believe any such use case has been brought up yet, so > I would imagine we will continue to support MSVC 2013 until the next > major release. > > > Language wise, 2015 comes with a lot of new C++ features. The most > > interesting to people will probably be template aliases, C++11 constexpr, > > the thread_local keyword, and thread-safe function local statics > (finally). &...