[Chandler-dev] Compiler versions

Andi Vajda vajda at osafoundation.org
Wed Apr 19 22:07:23 PDT 2006

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, Heikki Toivonen wrote:

> Andi Vajda wrote:
>> My preference is neither. We should document which compilers are known
>> to work so that developers who want reliability know what to work with.
> I don't see how this could work. Any code change could cause the build
> to break under some previously "known to work" compiler.

Yet it works great today. We know quite well which compilers work on the three 
OSs we support. Our build is using them. While any code change could cause 
lots of problems, usually that is not the case. And that is a good thing.

If a particular compiler, say gcc 4.x on Linux or Mac OS X, is particularly 
sensitive to some wx code changing for example, we'd consider taking it off 
the compilers-known-to-work list. We might even add it to the list of 
compilers-known-not-to-work once we know what code is causing what bug in the 
compiler. We should also consider filing that bug, most compilers we use are 
open source, after all. In other words, open source compilers get better 
because people use them and find bugs that get fixed.


More information about the chandler-dev mailing list