Since
<https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/f23aa1a51cb1beea4ebe3a61ba0c9b3abd844fd9%5E!/>
"Bump compiler plugins Clang baseline to 5.0.2" from about two years
ago, the baseline for (Linux) --enable-compiler-plugins builds is Clang
5.0.2.
Wasting time yesterday with
<https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/105234/1..4>, tracking down why
a loplugin:toolslong false positive started to appear with old Clang, I
wondered whether we could bump once again. The benefit would be getting
rid of various #if CLANG_VERSION cruft across compilerplugins/clang/,
and potentially avoiding wasting time on similar issues in the future.
(Plus, we could revisit
<https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2019-November/083780.html>
"On using C++17 for compilerplugins (not possible for now)".)
The question is what the maximum Clang version would be that we could
bump to as a baseline for (Linux) --enable-compiler-plugins builds.
(For (implicit) --disable-compiler-plugins builds, baselines can stay as
they are for now. And on macOS and Windows, I think I am the only one
using --enable-compiler-plugins, and I'm using Clang trunk there anyway.)
So, what is the maximum Clang version that people would be comfortable
with here?
lode already happens to provide a recipe to install Clang 9.0.1 on
Linux. so my suggestion---absent other constraints---would be to at
least bump to Clang 9, somewhat randomly.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
