I didn’t know that the GCC emulation went that deep. Anyway, I think that Clang should eventually wean away from being a GCC copycat, and that comment would be necessary. And if that doesn’t happen, another maintainer may wonder about Clang support, not knowing the details on Clang’s GCC emulation, and seeing the comment will save a trip to this mailing list. Sent from Windows Mail From: Mathias Gaunard Sent: ‎Monday‎, ‎May‎ ‎13‎, ‎2013 ‎5‎:‎45‎ ‎AM On 13/05/13 07:12, Daryle Walker wrote:

You should include a comment in the GCC section that it also works for Clang, due to Clang's GCC emulation. That way, later maintainers won't be wondering if Clang support should be added. (And help debugging if Clang ever stops emulating GCC by default.)

Isn't it common knowledge that Clang is compatible with GCC and pretends to be GCC 4.2, and that therefore most GCC-specific code will just work with Clang out of the box?