Skip to content

Conversation

alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

We no C++ and an incredibly small amount of C code as part of the build, so
there's not really much need for us to strictly check the version of compilers
as we're not really stressing anything. LLVM is a pretty huge chunk of C++ but
it should be the responsibility of LLVM to ensure that it can build with a
particular clang/gcc version, not ours (as this logic changes over time).

These version checks seem to basically just by us a regular stream of PRs every
six weeks or so when a new version is releases, so they're not really buying us
much. As a result, remove them and we can add then back piecemeal perhaps as a
blacklist if we really need to.

We no C++ and an incredibly small amount of C code as part of the build, so
there's not really much need for us to strictly check the version of compilers
as we're not really stressing anything. LLVM is a pretty huge chunk of C++ but
it should be the responsibility of LLVM to ensure that it can build with a
particular clang/gcc version, not ours (as this logic changes over time).

These version checks seem to basically just by us a regular stream of PRs every
six weeks or so when a new version is releases, so they're not really buying us
much. As a result, remove them and we can add then back piecemeal perhaps as a
blacklist if we really need to.
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @brson

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@brson
Copy link
Contributor

brson commented Jun 21, 2016

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 21, 2016

📌 Commit 3c77895 has been approved by brson

@nagisa
Copy link
Member

nagisa commented Jun 21, 2016

@alexcrichton we build C++ as part of our src/rustllvm and those pull in basically whole of the LLVM headers into them. In the odd-case where a prebuilt LLVM is used no compiler compatibility version checks will be done and we might encounter compatibility issues.

@nagisa
Copy link
Member

nagisa commented Jun 21, 2016

I’m not disagreeing with the change, though, but I think we should at least feature-check that c++11 mode is supported by the $CC.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member Author

@nagisa true yeah, but if we finish compiling LLVM then using that same compiler to compiler the C++ that we have is almost always guaranteed to succeed.

Manishearth added a commit to Manishearth/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2016
…r=brson

configure: Remove clang version checks

We no C++ and an incredibly small amount of C code as part of the build, so
there's not really much need for us to strictly check the version of compilers
as we're not really stressing anything. LLVM is a pretty huge chunk of C++ but
it should be the responsibility of LLVM to ensure that it can build with a
particular clang/gcc version, not ours (as this logic changes over time).

These version checks seem to basically just by us a regular stream of PRs every
six weeks or so when a new version is releases, so they're not really buying us
much. As a result, remove them and we can add then back piecemeal perhaps as a
blacklist if we really need to.
Manishearth added a commit to Manishearth/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2016
…r=brson

configure: Remove clang version checks

We no C++ and an incredibly small amount of C code as part of the build, so
there's not really much need for us to strictly check the version of compilers
as we're not really stressing anything. LLVM is a pretty huge chunk of C++ but
it should be the responsibility of LLVM to ensure that it can build with a
particular clang/gcc version, not ours (as this logic changes over time).

These version checks seem to basically just by us a regular stream of PRs every
six weeks or so when a new version is releases, so they're not really buying us
much. As a result, remove them and we can add then back piecemeal perhaps as a
blacklist if we really need to.
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2016
Rollup of 7 pull requests

- Successful merges: #34190, #34363, #34367, #34383, #34387, #34394, #34404
- Failed merges:
@bors bors merged commit 3c77895 into rust-lang:master Jun 22, 2016
@alexcrichton alexcrichton deleted the less-compiler-checks branch June 28, 2016 20:27
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member Author

Nominating for beta due to #34549 where the current beta branch (soon to become stable) will not compile on the most recent release of OSX. This should also have a very minimal impact on the actual behavior as well.

@alexcrichton alexcrichton added the beta-nominated Nominated for backporting to the compiler in the beta channel. label Jun 29, 2016
@alexcrichton alexcrichton added the beta-accepted Accepted for backporting to the compiler in the beta channel. label Jun 30, 2016
@brson brson removed the beta-nominated Nominated for backporting to the compiler in the beta channel. label Jun 30, 2016
brson added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 30, 2016
Backport #34383 and bump the beta version
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
beta-accepted Accepted for backporting to the compiler in the beta channel.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants