[RFC] Proposal: Clang C/C++ language working group

Hello all!

We would like to form a working group that focuses on facilitating and accelerating standard C/C++ language development in Clang/LLVM. This working group would meet at a regular cadence (weekly or bi-weekly depending on people’s schedules) and discuss topics relevant to C/C++ language development in Clang/LLVM. These topics would include (but not necessarily be limited to):

We would like to invite anyone to participate in the working group, especially those that have expertise in Clang internals relating to C and C++, or who are current or were past members of WG21 or WG14. In addition to facilitating and accelerating C/C++ language development in Clang, our goal is to build skills and knowledge in these respective areas. I’ll follow up to gauge preferred meetup times if there’s sufficient interest.

Regards,
Erich Keane (Intel), Aaron Ballman (Intel), Bob Monteleone (Intel), Jeff Heath (Intel)

7 Likes

It looks great. I would like to participate. How should I sign up?

Glad to hear! I’ll send out a request for preferred meetup time in the next couple of days.

Hi Jeff,

To be clear, this is about language features in Clang and not library features in libc++?
I did notice that the status pages referenced don’t include the libc++ status pages.

– Hubert Tong

Good clarification. I would suggest that the focus should be about C/C++ language features in Clang.

This is a great idea, thanks for putting it together. I’m also happy to participate / subscribe!

1 Like

I’d like to participate as well.

Thanks for starting this up. I am interested in joining along with @steven-wan-yu and potentially someone else.

I’d like to join.

I’d like to participate.

Thanks all for the feedback, it looks like there is good support for a Clang C/C++ language working group. I’ll create a new thread in the next day or two to vote on an initial meeting time, and will create a skeleton agenda/calendar.

@jrheng99, do you know if there would be interest in driving a GSoC project through this group on improving timing traces for Clang compile-time performance? In particular, I believe more information about the “user source” whose processing is contributing to the time spent would be useful. At this time, I think the crash diagnostic stack trace contexts may serve as a model for attributing time spent to the user source.

I set up a poll for the first meeting Poll: Meeting time for Clang C/C++ Language Working Group. Please indicate your preferred meeting time there. Thanks!

The initial meeting for the WG has been set to Wednesday March 2 at 11am-12pm ET. I’ve got full details here Poll: Meeting time for Clang C/C++ Language Working Group - #4 by jrheng99

1 Like

Reminder to all that our second WG meeting is scheduled for Wednesday March 16 at 11am-12pm ET.

I’ve also created created this week’s agenda WG agenda/minutes doc. Please let me know if anyone would like to add any topics.

Reminder to all that our second WG meeting is scheduled for Wednesday April 6 at 11am-12pm ET

Clang C/C++ Language Working Group Meeting
Wednesday, April 6 · 11:00am – 12:00pm
Google Meet joining info
Video call link: https://meet.google.com/ifi-uqto-kjw

I’ve also created created this week’s agenda WG agenda/minutes doc . Please let me know if anyone would like to add any topics.

I’m interested in these topics, and don’t currently have time to commit to working on language features (but may be able to in future).
Is it OK to join and listen in?

2 Likes

Absolutely, we’d love to have you. However, unless you want to be tagged on a bunch of reviews, you may want to separately decide whether to be in the clang-language-wg phabricator group or not.

1 Like

Hi All - I haven’t been very active in the past four years or so - but this group caught my eye (exciting!) and with an in-person standards meeting on the horizon, i’m feeling a little nostalgic and was going to test the llvm-waters again - maybe try and dust some of the rust off to see if I can still swim and keep up …

With that disclosure, I was thinking of tackling the ‘deducing this’ proposal - is anyone working on it?

Also - I have a patch that aims to make lambda captures more standards compliant and fix a PR- and i could use some feedback on that too:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25627
https://reviews.llvm.org/D92733

Would appreciate your thoughts.

thanks!

Hi @faisalv, I would recommend adding the subscriber clang-language-wg to your review to get the attention of the members of the WG. Hope you can join the next call on April 20!