zturner

3 ms·

1.
by zturner 4y ago
It’s extremely difficult to get new keywords into the language. This is a very large part of the reason we can only have new functionality in the library.
2.
by zturner 9y ago
More precisely: clang-cl is a drop-in replacement for cl (even the command lines are the same). But clang-cl is just a driver for clang, and it's still possible to get the ABI compatibility without clang-cl, but you have to know what y
3.
by zturner 9y ago
This sounds great, it's been a long time coming and I'm sure many people will appreciate being able to debug their mingw generated executables in Visual Studio. I did all of the PDB stuff in LLVM, happy to help if you need it (pin
4.
by zturner 9y ago
1) ABI compatibility is not present. With clang-cl you can compile half of your object files with MSVC and half with clang-cl, and link them together. That's very powerful. You might be thinking "but who is really gonna do that
5.
by zturner 9y ago
This is incorrect. FlushFiewOfFile and FlushFileBuffers only guarantees that contents are written to the physical media . It is not necessary (well, it is not supposed to be necessary) to call either of these functions for other proces
6.
Improving Link Time on Windows with Clang-Cl and Lld(blog.llvm.org)
1 points by zturner 9y ago|0 comments
7.
by zturner 12y ago
Minor implications, perhaps. Much of what was done to reach this point was just making LLDB not fall over miserably on Windows. Like, to compile.. Or to not crash on startup for example :) Anyone who decides they're interested in ma
8.
by zturner 12y ago
The LLVM project as a whole has many contributors from many different companies working on things they care about and contributing it back to the community.