Are llvm-gcc and clang binary compatible with gcc? - particularly mingw gcc on Windows.

Question

If I build a static library with llvm-gcc, then link it with a program compiled using mingw gcc, will the result work?

The same for other combinations of llvm-gcc, clang and normal gcc. I'm interested in how this works out on Linux (using normal non-mingw gcc, of course) and other platforms as well, but the emphasis is on Windows.

I'm also interested in all languages, but with a strong emphasis on C and C++ - obviously clang doesn't support Fortran etc, but I believe llvm-gcc does.

I assume they all use the ELF file format, but what about call conventions, virtual table layouts etc?

Answer 1

Sorry - I was coming back to llvm after a break, and have never done much more than the tutorial. First time around, I kind of burned out after the struggle getting LLVM 2.6 to build on MinGW GCC - thankfully not a problem with LLVM 2.7.

Going through the tutorial again today I noticed in Chapter 5 of the tutorial not only a clear statement that LLVM uses the ABI (Application Binary Interface) of the platform, but also that the tutorial compiler depends on this to allow access to external functions such as sin and cos.

I still don't know whether the compatible ABI extends to C++, though. That's not an issue of call conventions so much as name mangling, struct layout and vtable layout.

Being able to make C function calls is enough for most things, there's still a few issues where I care about C++.

Answer 2

Hopefully they fixed it but I avoid llvm-gcc because I (also) use llvm as a cross compiler and when you use llvm-gcc -m32 on a 64 bit machine the -m32 is ignored and you get 64 bit ints which have to be faked on your 32 bit target machine. Clang does not have that bug nor does gcc. Also the more I use clang the more I like. As to your direct question, dont know, in theory these days targets have well known or used calling conventions. And you would hope both gcc and llvm conform to the same but you never know. the simplest way to find this out is to write a couple of simple functions, compile and disassemble using both tool sets and see how they pass operands to the functions.

Answer 3

I don't know the answer, but slide 10 in this presentation seems to imply that the ".o" files produced by llvmgcc contain LLVM bytecode (.bc) instead of the usual target-specific object code, so that link-time optimization is possible. However, the LLVM linker should be able to link LLVM code with code produced by "normal" GCC, as the next slide says "link in native .o files and libraries here".

LLVM is a Linux tool, I have sometimes found that Linux compilers don't work quite right on Windows. I would be curious whether you get it to work or not.