|
|
|
|
|
|
by axman6
4702 days ago
|
|
|
Didn't Clang/compiler-rt have full support before GCC/libcxx (or whatever it's called) did? In my mind, and the minds of most others, this means actual full C++1 support. GCC claimed it early, but only because the compiler supported it fully, though afaict there were features which weren't supported in the runtime. Clang/compiler/rt fully support the language, and I believe they were the first to do so. |
|
|
"For information regarding the C++11 features available in the experimental C++11 mode, see http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html"*
That link shows that the compiler is feature complete, and refers (indirectly) to http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/status.html#s... for library support. That has quite a few 'missing x,y,z' or outright "N" markers.
gcc 4.8.1 is from May 31; Clang/LLVM _claimed_ full C++11 support in June (http://blog.llvm.org/2013/06/llvm-33-released.html)
Does that mean that clang passed the finish line earlier? Maybe, but it could just be that the gcc project looks harder for bugs in their own project, thus placing their finish line farther out.
Frankly, it doesn't really matter who was first. It's way more important to know whether the compilers generate correct code and if they do, that it is efficient.