discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RFC: Changing clang defaults for 3.1


From: Sebastian Reitenbach
Subject: Re: RFC: Changing clang defaults for 3.1
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 18:28:25 +0200
User-agent: SOGoMail 1.3.14

 
On Friday, April 6, 2012 12:37 CEST, David Chisnall <address@hidden> wrote: 
 
> On 6 Apr 2012, at 07:09, Sebastian Reitenbach wrote:
> 
> > Does gnustep-make handle all those new clang parameters? If not, I'd prefer 
> > to keep everything as is for OpenBSD.
> 
> I believe GNUstep Make should work fine if you specify the extra OBJCFLAGS 
> when configuring it (it doesn't need to know what they mean, it will just 
> pass them to the compiler).
> 
> I've tested configure of make and base with the non-fragile ABI as the 
> default, and it all appeared to work.  I'd especially like to make the new 
> dispatch mechanism the default for x86[-64] and ARM on any platforms where 
> the GNUstep runtime is going to be standard, because this give a 10% size 
> reduction in base and much faster message sends.
> 
> > I still have one or two ports in the tree that don't work with 
> > non-fragile-abi.
> 
> Is it possible to fix them?  They will also find it difficult to work with 
> modern OS X.  

They probably can be fixed ;)
If I don't find out how to do that, I'll ask back on discuss@

I still have not yet made clang the default compiler for the ports, so after 
rethinking, I think you should go ahead. If I really run into problems, which I 
hope not, I'll have to deal with it later, or disable features, using the 
OBJCFLAGS.

cheers,
Sebastian


> 
> David 
 
 
 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]