| 18 Dec 2025 |
 K900 | This is all a significant amount of work | 13:21:27 |
 matthewcroughan | only the things that actually get used/maintained, or that don't break often are included in nixpkgs pretty much | 13:21:32 |
| K900 | Especially when we're basically banned from using new compiler features until all supported compilers support it | 13:21:44 |
| matthewcroughan | or at least that's the goal, and there's enough evidence of things being introduced that don't work like that in the past being stuck in nixpkgs that people rely on | 13:21:56 |
 bake.monorail | I'm looking at LLVM, there aren't a lot of patches, but yeah. | 13:22:21 |
| K900 | You can go look at any previous GCC version removal PR | 13:22:25 |
| K900 | Or LLVM for that matter | 13:22:30 |
| K900 | To see how much code those end up dropping | 13:22:36 |
| bake.monorail | what project are you talking about? nix?
is nix supposed to build with all the compilers in nixpkgs? I'm not saying that anything should build with it, just make the compiler available. | 13:23:08 |
| K900 | I'm talking about the cc-wrapper | 13:23:19 |
| K900 | Which is a component in nixpkgs that wraps compiler executables to make them behave the way we want | 13:23:35 |
| bake.monorail | to be honest I'd be happy to have older clangs even without the cc-wrapper, but I understand mine could be a niche use case. | 13:25:10 |
