Hi all,
I just wanted to know if anyone's looked into using the free version of
Microsoft's Visual C++ toolkit for LLVM:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/
-bw
--
|| "If wishes and buts were clusters of nuts, we'd all have a bowl of
|| granola!" - Mr. Jellineck
Bill Wendling wrote: } Hi all, } } I just wanted to know if anyone's looked into using the free version of } Microsoft's Visual C++ toolkit for LLVM: } } http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/ } Hmm...nevermind. I can think of reasons why this probably isn't a good idea :-) -bw -- || "If wishes and buts were clusters of nuts, we'd all have a bowl of || granola!" - Mr. Jellineck
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Bill Wendling wrote:> I just wanted to know if anyone's looked into using the free version of > Microsoft's Visual C++ toolkit for LLVM: > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/Sorry, but it is not even close to working (its template and STL support is horribly lacking). The Visual Studio "Whidbey" compiler, now in beta, will handle it though with only a reasonable amount of tweaking to the LLVM sources. I have no idea about when Microsoft intends to release it though, but I would guess that it will be sometime soon. Google can probably tell you :) -Chris -- http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/ http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/Projects/
Chris Lattner wrote:> On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Bill Wendling wrote: > > I just wanted to know if anyone's looked into using the free version of > > Microsoft's Visual C++ toolkit for LLVM: > > > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/ > > Sorry, but it is not even close to working (its template and STL support > is horribly lacking). The Visual Studio "Whidbey" compiler, now in beta, > will handle it though with only a reasonable amount of tweaking to the > LLVM sources. I have no idea about when Microsoft intends to release it > though, but I would guess that it will be sometime soon. Google can > probably tell you :)Chris, I think you're wrong. The above link is GUI-less version of VC7.1, and it's template support has being hugely improved since VC7. Looking at regression test summary for C++ Boost: http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/ (the bottom of the page), you can see that this compiler fails mere 3% of tests. The tests are libraries, not standard conformance, but still it says something about compiler quality. As a personal experience, when I've added my own library to Boost, the VC7.1 was the only windows compiler which did not expose bugs. - Volodya