Subject: Re: [boost] clang on mingw
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-03-04 15:42:05
Niall Douglas wrote:
> I will say this though: there is a whole ton of incentive for clang to
> become perfectly substitutable for MSVC.
There probably is, which is why we have a 3/4-broken clang-cl instead of a
fully working clang-mingw32 (which would have taken a lot less of effort).
That's unfortunate, at least for me. I have no immediate or critical need
for a perfect substitute for MSVC - we already have two of those. I need
Clang on Windows so that I can test for portability and Clang-specific
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk