4 ms·

Wait does this mean that LLVM supports C++ well now? Last time I checked at WWDC, it had great C and Objective-C support, but C++ was hardly there. It would b

• bryansum 17y ago
  Looks like there's still a lot of work to be done: http://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html http://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html
  • gane5h 17y ago
    In my opinion, I believe llvm-g++ is a more promising approach to supporting C++. C++ is an incredibly difficult language to parse, so why not re-use work that has already been done?
    • yuvi 17y ago
      Useful error messages. Even in C gcc is lacking, let alone C++, and I'd imagine that fixing this in gcc wouldn't be/have been much easier than writing clang.
    • pieter 17y ago
      Because g++ has its own problems that won't be solved by switching backends, like unclear diagnostics. Then there's the license issue, which can be important for some. Clang is also built as a library, so you can link to it and JIT c-code at runtime.
  • tbrownaw 17y ago
    That's dated December 19, so I'd imagine it's a bit out of date.