Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] clang-win, again
From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-26 12:44:59

On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 14:05, Edward Diener via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>

> This entire thread was started because using clang-cl with clang-win did
> not work for the OP.

It doesn't.

I have expressed the opinion that I have gotten
> clang targeting vc++, which you insist is not clang-cl in any way even
> though it uses the vc++ headers and libraries, to mostly work, except
> for some linking issues over a number of releases of clang, when testing
> Boost libraries.

So, you also say it doesn't work. Peter also pointed out that the wrong
jam-file is used [in the way you set up the config file], which possibly
leads to linker errors further down the line.

If you have a setup under Boost using clang-cl and clang-win that works
> in your testing of Boost libraries please present that setup in the form
> of jamfile code.

If I would have that [something that works], I would post that and be done
with it [I would shut up].

Otherwise we are discussing this to no purpose.

Until it provably works for more than one person, this discussion **is**
useful. I don't have the impression, though, that we are discussing this
problem in the most effective way. You keep on mixing in the issue of not
being able to build Clang/LLVM itself from source, I don't understand what
that has to do with the issue at hand [not being able to build Boost with

The latest correspondent asked in this thread for some setup that would
> work
> and I gave to him what works for me best using clang.

You're actually saying it doesn't work, you are bringing up linker issues,
but I think there are more issues. But as I say, until you just download a
Clang binary [the windows one: or] and go on and try
build Boost with Clang, we are all just looking at spaghetti on the wall.


*“If something cannot go on forever, it will stop" - Herbert Stein*

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at