* On 4/16/19 9:30 AM, Mihai Moldovan wrote: > The cxx11 1.1 PG currently sets compiler.whitelist to some value (either > mp-gcc-6.0/7.0 or mp-clang-5.0) and follows up with a bit of blacklisting if > the > stdlib is libc++ and otherwise just blacklists.
That's what I get for just skimming stuff. It's actually the other way around -
it only uses compiler.whitelist for libstdc++ systems, while the others add a
blacklist only.
> Something like
>
> compiler.whitelist clang macports-clang-5.0
> compiler.blacklist {clang < 500}
>
> might be a way to prefer recent-enough system compilers (needing
> compiler.blacklist for the compiler_blacklist_versions-1.0 magic), while
> forcing
> a fallback of macports-clang-5.0. If that is what we WANT, anyway.
Totally unnecessary in this case, since we know that systems on libstdc++ won't
have recent enough system compilers, my bad.
> In the ppc case, we can just continue to force macports-gcc-6.0
> macports-gcc-7.0, although the 7.0 part is currently redundant because we do
> have a mp-gcc-6.0 port and it would only kick in if there wasn't.
>
> The convoluted compiler.blacklist line could just be deleted.
That still stands, though.
> So much for the cxx11-1.1 PG rant, but it's not just cxx11-1.1 that gets this
> stuff wrong. Is there really no way we can make sure that developers don't run
> into this trap any longer? The current behavior is unintuitive and requires
> base
> code knowledge to (mostly) get what one is looking for. Even with that
> knowledge
> there is currently no way to prefer *installed* compilers.
Also this.
Mihai
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
