U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Status & Roadmap

Authors & License

Funding Ultimate++

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Clang / lld (

) 1 Vote

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Return to the default flat view

Create a new topic

Submit Reply

Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 [message #51730 is a reply to message #51728]

Sat, 04 May 2019 08:48

mirek is currently offline

mirek
Messages: 14267
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

cbpporter wrote on Fri, 03 May 2019 15:11

mirek wrote on Fri, 03 May 2019 12:50
cbpporter wrote on Fri, 03 May 2019 10:27
I upgraded to 13076 and there is no lld.exe inside.

Did you replace the executable with the same name or is this not included for testing yet?

Yes, it is renamed to ld.exe.

You can easily detect its presence by mingw link times...

Mirek

Thanks!

Next, we need to use clang to compile .

Interestingly, from my tests, mingw / lld might be now ideal combo for Win. Clang is not faster compiler and does not produce better code than GCC 8. It even now seems that mingw/lld might be slightly better than Visual C++. The produced code seems a little bit more refined, link times are virtually zero while Visual C++ linker is fast, but still takes a couple of seconds to link large app (like theide). Compile times are about 2x worse, but in normal development cycle link times might be more important.

The only problem with mingw was horrible TLS implementation, but I have now workaround for that for the next release.

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

[Message index]

		Clang / lld By: Novo on Fri, 19 April 2019 22:50
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Sat, 20 April 2019 00:56
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: Novo on Sat, 20 April 2019 01:05
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Tue, 23 April 2019 16:38
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: Novo on Tue, 23 April 2019 17:29
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Wed, 24 April 2019 09:04
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: cbpporter on Wed, 24 April 2019 09:50
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Wed, 24 April 2019 10:51
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Wed, 24 April 2019 10:56
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Wed, 24 April 2019 14:45
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Thu, 25 April 2019 07:57
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: Novo on Thu, 25 April 2019 16:14
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: cbpporter on Fri, 03 May 2019 10:27
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Fri, 03 May 2019 11:50
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: cbpporter on Fri, 03 May 2019 15:11
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: Novo on Fri, 03 May 2019 17:49
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Sat, 04 May 2019 08:48
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: Tom1 on Fri, 10 May 2019 11:49
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: mirek on Sat, 11 May 2019 16:05
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: Novo on Sat, 11 May 2019 19:29
		Re: Possible new package or overhaul proposals for U++ in 2019 By: Tom1 on Mon, 13 May 2019 09:37

Previous Topic:	Two new nasty GCC warnings that I am going to disable
Next Topic:	Example websocket SSL

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

PDF

]

Current Time: Mon Aug 25 22:12:59 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.06248 seconds