Hi all,
I'm wondering what the comparative status of llvm-gcc4.0 vs. llvm-gcc4.2
is. Can anybody tell? (A URL would be fine, I may have been just too
dumb to find it.)
Regards,
Jo
officially support for llvm-gcc4.0 has been dropped.
unofficially I still keep llvm-gcc4.0 compiling because I need it for
some stuff. But this will only last until I can use 4.2.
Andrew
Hi all,
I'm wondering what the comparative status of llvm-gcc4.0 vs. llvm-gcc4.2
is. Can anybody tell? (A URL would be fine, I may have been just too
dumb to find it.)
There isn't one.
I can tell you that when I did the release testing that for most platforms there were no new regressions with llvm-gcc-4.2 on llvm-test. I didn't look at performance between the two though.
Since LLVM 2.2 we have dropped support for llvm-gcc-4.0.
-Tanya
Hi Jo,
I'm wondering what the comparative status of llvm-gcc4.0 vs. llvm-gcc4.2
is. Can anybody tell? (A URL would be fine, I may have been just too
dumb to find it.)
development of llvm-gcc-4.0 has stopped: only 4.2 is being worked on.
The version of 4.2 in the last LLVM release was already mostly superior
to 4.0 IMHO.
Ciao,
Duncan.
So the recommendation would be to use 4.2 for all uses, yes?
(Bootstrapping LLVM itself, compiling C/C++ software, whatever.)
Regards,
Jo
4.2 is *complete*. Are you looking for performance #? Since llvm-gcc doesn't use any of gcc's optimization and codegen passes it should roughly the same. In fact, that's what we have been seeing. We have formally deprecated llvm-gcc 4.0 as far as I know.
Evan
OK, that's a clear roadmap.
Maybe the docs should be updated to reflect this status? They still present 4.0 as if it were the default that one should use.
Regards,
Jo
Hi Joachim,
We've officially moved to llvm-gcc 4.2 and are no longer keeping llvm-gcc 4.0 up-to-date. (Andrew keeps 4.0 compiling, but we no longer care about keeping it feature-compatible with 4.2.)
-bw
Yes. 
-bw
No, I'm just trying to bootstrap llvm-gcc.
Even after that, performance will remain relatively unimportant for me
for quite a while, and even then I'll want to compete with PHP (or
Python, Ruby, Perl), and I don't think this will be a challenge.
Regards,
Jo
officially support for llvm-gcc4.0 has been dropped.
unofficially I still keep llvm-gcc4.0 compiling because I need it for
some stuff. But this will only last until I can use 4.2.OK, that's a clear roadmap.
Please do not rely on llvm-gcc.40. I sent out this announcement last month:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-February/012416.html
Maybe the docs should be updated to reflect this status? They still present 4.0 as if it were the default that one should use.
2.2 docs will still have references to llvm-gcc4.0. Can you point out specifically which docs you are referring to? I'm pretty sure we were ambiguous on which one to use 
but regardless should be updated.
-Tanya
http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#quickstart says on item #4:
"Install the llvm-gcc4.0 (or llvm-gcc4.2) front end if you intend to
compile C or C++"
(Actually this passage should be updated with a hint why one would want
to choose one or the other compiler.)
I'm not sure about other passages, that's just he page I was working
off.
Regards,
Jo