New clang/llvm ports

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Nov 23, 2011, at 01:45, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:

> On Nov 4, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
> 
>> On Nov 4, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Michael Feiri wrote:
>> 
>>> One thing I'd like to do while these ports are still "in the making" is to adjust the names to follow our usual scheme for versioned ports, e.g. gcc46, python27, scala29, etc.
>> 
>> Ok, go ahead.  Sooner rather than later is better.
> 
> Since Michael never did this, and these ports have been there a while, I'm guessing we should just keep these.  I personally never liked the naming without the "-", so I'm glad to be ditching that.  The lack of - and . characters makes those port names ambiguous.

Well the vast majority of existent versioned ports are named without dash and dot, so it would be more consistent to continue that tradition.

I have not had a chance to try these llvm ports with pure; I'll try to do that soon. It's meant to be compatible with llvm 2.9 and 3.0.