C++11 in LibreOffice
mstahl at redhat.com
Thu Jul 19 04:45:19 PDT 2012
On 17/07/12 21:21, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> On 07/17/2012 05:11 AM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
>> So, as long as we require to build LO with MSVC, we can revisit the question
>> of hard-depending on C++11 in, uhm, let's be optimistic and say 3 years. IOW,
>> we can probably get there faster by ditching backwards ABI compatibility with
>> LO4 and switching to a different compiler for Windows.
> What I'm curious is how the binaries generated from different compilers
> compare on Windows. If their performances are more or less comparable,
> then I could care less whether we stick with MSVC or gcc (or clang if
> it's available on Windows). But if MSVC still produces more optimized
> binaries, then I would be reluctant to support switching to a different
> compiler (though my voice is only one head count, easily overruled by
> the majority votes when it comes down to it).
i don't believe an office suite will benefit all that much from
sophisticated compiler optimizations; most of the problems we have are
due to stupid algorithms/data structures that don't scale.
the _real_ question is, how can you debug problems that happen only on
Windows, what does MinGW offer there, does it actually work or does gdb
crash all the time like it did 5 years ago on Linux.
also, how do you run unit tests when cross compiling?
but if you really care here's some recent windows benchmarks that look
reasonably well done at first glance, and GCC looks very competitive
with MSVC, though Intel is faster still:
More information about the LibreOffice