CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
wojtek at wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
Wed Jun 20 12:02:37 UTC 2012
>> still not stopped personal attacks (last part of last sentence) but lets
> 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_
What is specifically my preference?
> 1) Your opinion about the choice of the standard compiler "doesn't matter".
Once more - messing with my words and you know this. I am saying that it
doesn't matter others than performance.
Clang performance is just bad.
> 2) The decision _has_ been made. The only question at this point is "when".
And can be reversed because it is faulty.
I successfully predicted the fall of linux (in quality point of view)
years ago, then netbsd - after this and my prediction were good.
Now i predict FreeBSD will fall within 2015 time frame.
What i mean fall - that it would be better to use older version as long as
possible because newer are worse.
- FreeBSD 6 was an improvement
- FreeBSD 7 was an improvement, except first releases but that's normal
- FreeBSD 8 was a big improvement in performance and quality.
FreeBSD 9 as for now:
- have similar performance at most
- have some improvement and important functionality like TRIM support.
- have some useful functionality like softdep journalling, but risky.
Still - forcing full check reveals some inconsistencies now and then.
FreeBSD 10 will unlikely be better, but for sure slower unless you will
force gcc build that MAYBE will work. possibly not.
So now there will be more and more backports done by users just for new
drivers until something that replace FreeBSD will be available. Assuming
there will at all.
Wish i am wrong. Twice i wasn't
More information about the freebsd-questions