CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
fred.morcos at gmail.com
Wed Jun 20 08:45:16 UTC 2012
The answer is:
1. gcc will still be available through the ports system.
2. The move to clang/llvm as a default compiler will reduce the amount
of GPL code in the base system, eventually reducing distribution
issues (especially for 3rd parties).
3. clang/llvm provides better error and warning messages, as well as
good static code analysis, which helps reduce some classes of bugs and
eventually will result in a more reliable FreeBSD system.
4. clang/llvm is improving quickly.
5. clang/llvm is more modular than gcc, although there are plans for
gcc to become as modular, it will take time.
6. gcc produces faster code, but clang/llvm will eventually (soon
enough) get there.
7. From the reasons above, it makes sense to complete a task sooner
rather than later, especially that clang/llvm isn't showing any signs
of weakness (lack of development power, etc).
8. There might be more reasons for or against, but I couldn't think of any.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Wojciech Puchar
<wojtek at wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>> Yes Wojciech, I can attempt an answer for you. Pay attention, this gets
>> very complex.
>> The decision to move to Clang was motivated by what is best for the
>> project, and not what is best for Wojciech.
> still not stopped personal attacks (last part of last sentence) but lets
> So please give an answer - not summary.
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-questions