Re: [boost] [regression runner] Preference libstdc++ vs. libc++

Subject: Re: [boost] [regression runner] Preference libstdc++ vs. libc++
From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-09 13:36:32

On 8 March 2017 at 11:47, Edward Diener via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> Thanks for the link, but it hardly qualifies as documentation for that
> product. If it is like clang for Windows targeting VC++ it has a broken
> emulation of the non-standard VC++ preprocessor which makes it more than
> useless to me.

 ... about as useless as cl.exe (C1/C2) itself, I guess... The only
usefullness of the Clang/C2 combo is the better debugging support it
provides (as compared to Clang/LLVM)... Clang/C2 cannot beat Clang/LLVM, at
best it's on par (but often not) and it's released version is lagging the
clang/LLVM release schedule.... As/when used from the IDE,  Clang/LLVM
integrates and works well... makes programming in C++ on Windows much more
pleasant (more comprehensible error messages, although the M$ STL doesn't
always help in this regard) and often generates better code...

As to docs: the exe's do have (clang) help screens, accessible from the
command-line. General Clang/LLVM docs on the web-site...

As to vapourware: I guess it is, since AFAIK it (Clang/C2) is still an
'experimental' project, and as such not supported (as in 'don't use in
production code').

degski