Re:Toward _FORTIFY_SOURCE Parity Between Clang and GCC
by favorited on Wednesday February 12, 2020 @10:17PM
(#22315052)
Though obviously not because of Clang, the pace of C++ itself significantly increased since Clang was introduced.
Re:Toward _FORTIFY_SOURCE Parity Between Clang and GCC
by pjmlp on Thursday February 13, 2020 @02:45AM
(#22316039)
However, because Clang, we have finally IDEs caughting up with Energize C++ and VA for C++ v4 ideas, a couple of decades after they shown what would be possible with C++ when one isn't constrained to UNIX mentality of development.
Re:Toward _FORTIFY_SOURCE Parity Between Clang and GCC
by inetknght on Thursday February 13, 2020 @09:49AM
(#22318104)
What do you mean?
Re:Toward _FORTIFY_SOURCE Parity Between Clang and GCC
by pjmlp on Thursday February 13, 2020 @11:21AM
(#22318906)
I mean this,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQQTScuApWk
http://dreamsongs.com/Files/Energize.pdf
http://www.edm2.com/index.php/VisualAge_C%2B%2B_4.0_Review
Basically Smalltalk like development experience, just for C++. Too advanced for early 90's computers (it demanded very high end hardware).
I would argue that the pace of C++ compiler development has significantly increased since clang was introduced.
I would surmise that elimination of GCC or Clang -- in the way that Chrome has resulted in the elimination of more than one competing browser -- would be detrimental to C++ as a whole.
And therefore, I would say: yes, it's leading to more features and better compilation that if it was just one compiler toolchain.