[Info-vax] General Availability of 9.2 for x86-64

[Simon Clubley]

On 2022-07-15, John Reagan <xyzzy1959 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Part of the reason why Macro-32 was first is that it needed the fewest pieces to get
> it native.  It still needed changes since the "assembler" interface to a current
> LLVM is different than the interface for the LLVM 3.4.2 code-base.  Plus
> it all relied on a C++ compiler since all of LLVM is in C++ along with a single
> module inside the XMACRO compiler.

Believe me, I am very aware of the fact LLVM is written in C++. :-)

I am also aware that the LLVM team keeps moving to the latest "shiny" on
a regular basis instead of developing LLVM against a C++ standard that
has been available for a long time. I see they are currently at C++14.
I wonder when they will be moving again. :-)

Update: I had a look. It seems they are already talking about moving
to C++17 as the new base. :-(

See:

https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-increasing-the-gcc-and-clang-requirements-to-support-c-17-in-llvm/59983

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.