<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times; "><pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; ">is llvm39 still the one to be used?</pre></span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I still use +llvm39</div><div><br></div><div><div>$ port -v installed | grep ld64</div><div> ld64 @3_1+universal-ld64_127-ld64_236-ld64_97 (active) platform='darwin 10' archs='i386 x86_64' date='2018-09-20T16:56:39-0700'</div><div> ld64-latest @274.2_2+llvm39+universal-llvm34 (active) platform='darwin 10' archs='i386 x86_64' date='2017-11-26T13:19:27-0800'</div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>One thing you learn in this, is to be current but not too current. There is no benefit to trying to ride the dragon's tale here -- you just run into a lot of new errors that haven't been dealt with yet.</div><div><br></div><div>llvm3.9 is about equal to Sierra. That's a pretty good spot. I haven't really tried anything newer yet.</div><div><br></div><div>I was configured to use clang-3.9 as my primary compiler up until a few weeks ago, when I fixed clang-5.0+ to enable thread_local storage, and so have just recently set clang-5.0 as my default compiler.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Ken</div></body></html>