1 |
On 12/18/13 02:54 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> Hello, folks. |
3 |
> |
4 |
Hi |
5 |
|
6 |
<snip> |
7 |
> Basically, I've hit this with sys-devel/llvm. A user has requested lldb |
8 |
> support to be enabled in the ebuild [2]. Sadly, lldb requires C++11 to |
9 |
> be used, and this means that whole LLVM needs to become C++11 enabled. |
10 |
> And then, it would be at least recommended that all reverse deps become |
11 |
> C++11 enabled as well. |
12 |
/* |
13 |
Personally, I think lldb is pooh (bloated mess that has poor internal |
14 |
design, offers little or no logical features that can't be accomplished |
15 |
with source access+printf and takes a needlessly long time to compile as |
16 |
a result) |
17 |
*/ |
18 |
-------- |
19 |
If the only driving motivation is lldb then I think this isn't worth the |
20 |
effort and I wonder what may be incompatible as a result. Long term it |
21 |
certainly should happen - I can't/won't argue or disagree with the long |
22 |
term merits, but when.. and who will do all that work.. |
23 |
|
24 |
Just a heads up that clang/llvm will (have in svn trunk) force building |
25 |
with c++11 for the next major release (6 months from now). So unless |
26 |
some 3rd party goes and backports or removes the c++11 pieces - this |
27 |
will add to the list of c++11 only software in the near future. |