CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program

Robert Bonomi bonomi at
Wed Jun 20 10:15:10 UTC 2012

[ Semi-apologies to all for being blunt, and possibly somewhat offensive. ]
[ More tactful approaches have been shown to be ineffective, and Wojceich  ]
[ has a demonstrated propensity to blather on as though he knows more     ]
[ about everything than anyone else.                                      ]

> From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek at>
> > 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 
> forget.

Fact; that was NOT a personal attack.  Your entire line of reasoning so far
has been about -your- preferences, and things as you see them, for _your_ 
use.  The Project does not make decisions based on what is best for any
particular user -- be it 'Wojceich' or _anyone_ else.

You admit you are 'not a developer'.  That *you* don't see problems, is
irrelevant to whether those who _are_ developers do.  Your perceptions 
of problems, or the lack thereof, is similarly immaterial. Those who _do_
do the work have a number of valid issues with GCC, of -long- standing.
*Major* users of FreeBSD have serious 'issues' with the GPLv3, based on
the opinions received from their professional legal counsel -- your "legally
uninformed" opinion not withstanding.

> So please give an answer - not summary.

What would be the use of *repeating* the _multiple_ valid reasons that, in 
combination, compelled the Project to make the change?  

They were already provided, once, far earlier in this thread.

You dismissed them, and dragged in 'strawman' reasoning, based on arrogant
personal bias and flawed reasoning/analysis.

The facts;

  1) Your opinion about the choice of the standard compiler "doesn't matter".

  2) The decision _has_ been made. The only question at this point is "when".

  3) Nobody 'owes' you an explanation for why the decision was made.
     Nonetheless, you _were_ given an outline of the multiple factors that
     went into the decision.

  4) In your personal view, you didn't find those reasons compelling.
     Too bad for you.  But -irrelevant- to the decision process.

  5) You _are_ 'free' to use GCC for anything you want, now or in the future.
     Nobody is under any obligation to make it particularly 'easy' for you.

  6) In the future, to use GCC you may have to do lots of code fix-ups on 
     base-system components -- to work around situations where GCC generates
     *BAD*CODE* from standards-compliant source, and/or where GNU has 
     introduced 'extensions' that are incompatible with standards-compliant

     That _is_ your choice, and your problem.  The Project has chosen not to
     spend any more time working around those _growing_ deficiencies in GCC.
     You have stated that you are 'not a developer' -- that means that you
     are _not_competent_ to have an opinion with regard to the magnitude of
     problems the 'non standards compliant' behavior of all even remotely-
     recent versions of GCC causes.

  7) *Regardless* of your "non-professional" opinion of the GPLv3, it is a
     undisputed fact that it is 'unacceptable' to many large-scale users (and
     paying supporters of FreeBSD), based on the opinions of their PAID, 
     PROFESSIONAL, legal counsel.

  8) "Keeping Wojciech happy", at the 'cost' of *all* the problems that using
     newer versions of GCC brings to the Project, it's staff, and it's 
     _major_ users, is simply 'not worth it.'

Live with it.

Your ongoing "bitching and moaning" about the already-made decision is *NOT* 
going to change anything.  And is getting tiresome to listen to.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list