Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #55417, comment 12
- Timestamp:
- Nov 28, 2017, 7:40:59 AM (6 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Ticket #55417, comment 12
initial v1 3 3 There is some benefit to going through the process of blacklisting old compilers, I guess, but it comes at a substantial cost. It takes time to figure out where the line should be drawn, you have to do something about PPC (or not), and in the end you build with an old, clunky clang version (usually clang-3.4, which is ancient). And who wants to spend time debugging clang-3.4 build failures? And, the next time the port is updated, more than likely the compiler line will move up again. 4 4 5 The cxx11 1.1 PortGroup forces a nice new clang-5.0, or on PPC, gcc6. It only changes the stdlib switch for c++, where it is almost certainly needed (for C11 it is ignored). How many ports are there that need C11, and use c++, but don't need c++11 (therefore could hit that narrow gap between the two standards, using C11 and still being able to use the old, non-c++11 libstdc++ . I can't think of any.5 The cxx11 1.1 PortGroup forces a nice new clang-5.0, or on PPC, gcc6. It only changes the stdlib switch for c++, where it is almost certainly needed (for C11 it is ignored). How many ports are there that need C11, and use c++, but don't need c++11 (therefore could hit that narrow gap between the two standards, using C11 and still being able to use the old, non-c++11 libstdc++). I can't think of any. 6 6 7 7 Most older systems will already have clang-5.0 installed anyway, as you need it to built half the software now (everything in the cxx11 1.1 PortGroup). To me, it's a very easy win, win, win.