Subject: Re: [boost] clang-win, again
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-26 13:00:16
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of degski via Boost
> Sent: 26 October 2018 13:45
> To: boost
> Cc: degski; Edward Diener
> Subject: Re: [boost] clang-win, again
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 14:05, Edward Diener via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> 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:
> https://prereleases.llvm.org/win-snapshots/LLVM-8.0.0-r339319-win64.exe or
> https://releases.llvm.org/7.0.0/LLVM-7.0.0-win64.exe] and go on and try
> build Boost with Clang, we are all just looking at spaghetti on the wall.
I'm following this discussion with interest and I want to use Clang on windows with VS, or Clang Codeblocks using Mingw - which works but is less suitable for big tests, so most of all with b2/bjam so I can write using toolset=MSVC,GCC,Clang ...
I'd also want to use the binary release like https://releases.llvm.org/7.0.0/LLVM-7.0.0-win64.exe, so I think any effort should be directed at that.
We seem to be so near and yet so far. I sense that the jam files are the key.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk