clang memory usage vs. gcc (and OS X 10.8, 10.9, ...)

[Christopher Jones]

On 16 Mar 2014, at 7:14pm, René J.V. Bertin <rjvbertin at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On Mar 16, 2014, at 19:49, Brandon Allbery wrote:
>> http://trac.macports.org/wiki/FAQ#libcpp
>> 
>> Linux gets around this by forcing everything to the new runtime; Apple will not ship GPL3 stuff so stuck to older gcc with the older runtime, until they moved to clang completely in 10.9 and switched to clang's C++11 runtime. (gcc/g++'s C++11 runtime is GPL3+ only.)
> 
> But how can the situation be any different if system libraries use either the GNU C++11 runtime or the clang one?

Its different because Apple, because of the above GPL3+ issue, will not provide either gcc release that uses libc++, or a clang release that uses libstdc++. Linux, being GPL3+ friendly is happy to do the work, so on recent Linux systems you get up to date clang and gcc releases that a) both support c++11 and b) can be intermixed, as both use the same c++ runtime.

> 
>> Hi, "C++11" refers to a standard defined by a standards committee. The problem is a *licensing* issue, and Apple made its choice in that matter and nobody can do anything about it.
> 
> Sigh ... something like "or how lawyers can mess up perfectly good standards"? Or does the standard not cover the ABI?

The standard (correctly) has absolutely nothing to do with specific implementations of that standard. The ‘issue’ is Apple will not touch anything released under GPL3+, and the most recent c++11 supporting version of libstdc++ is released under this. As such you will never get it on OSX, and thus the fact that in order to support c++11 on OSX you must use libc++.

Chris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2030 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/attachments/20140316/d4989d62/attachment.p7s>