{"id":1417,"date":"2015-01-25T07:50:15","date_gmt":"2015-01-24T21:50:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/?p=1417"},"modified":"2015-01-25T08:04:04","modified_gmt":"2015-01-24T22:04:04","slug":"comment-the-speed-of-clang","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/?p=1417","title":{"rendered":"Comment: The speed of Clang Development"},"content":{"rendered":"

Nicola left this comment on “The Growth of C++11 Support<\/a>“:<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s interesting to see how far behind Clang starts in comparison to the others, and that it ends up in a close dance with GCC on the way to full C++11 support.\u201d<\/p>\n

Yeah, but the little detail is that the first version of clang that you listed, 2.8, probably didn\u2019t support C++ at all<\/b>. Clang is such a young project after all. The first versions supported C and Objective-C (that were the main interests for Apple which at the time was the main and only real contributor). Then they started the development of C++ support and it took them less than two years<\/b> to implement the full C++03 standard! This chart really doesn\u2019t express how fast clang developers have worked to support this very complex language.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Between http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Clang<\/a>\u00a0and http:\/\/llvm.org\/releases\/<\/a> it appears that Clang was able to compile all of Boost as of (or soon thereafter) version 2.7 — I think it’s fair to say that C++03 support was pretty robust as of version 2.8.<\/p>\n

This chart<\/a> illustrate exactly how quickly C++11 support has been added to Clang: starting behind the others, Clang was second to have full C++11 support, and (iirc) only second because of the timing of release cycles. The same pattern is clear in the other charts<\/a>:\u00a0the rate that modern C++ support has been added to Clang has consistently outstripped that of the competition.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Nicola left this comment on “The Growth of C++11 Support“: \u201cIt\u2019s interesting to see how far behind Clang starts in comparison to the others, and that it ends up in a close dance with GCC on the way to full C++11 support.\u201d Yeah, but the little detail is that the first version of clang that … Continue reading “Comment: The speed of Clang Development”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[68],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1417"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1417"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1417\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1422,"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1417\/revisions\/1422"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1417"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1417"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/brnz.org\/hbr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1417"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}