CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
perrin at apotheon.com
Wed Jun 20 21:14:18 UTC 2012
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 08:40:56PM +0400, Евгений Лактанов wrote:
> 20.06.2012 18:47, Mark Felder пишет:
> > On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:43:14 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
> > <email address elided for purposes of courtesy> wrote:
> >> [attribution lost by Wojciech Puchar and I'm too lazy to check]
> >>> Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the
> >>> CLANG project?
> >> because we already have great compiler - GCC. In spite of using GPL
> >> licence.
> > GCC performs well, but it is a very messy undocumented codebase which
> > makes maintaining it a nightmare. Just ask Google -- you'll find many
> > others saying the same thing. It would take MORE work to get FreeBSD
> > devs up to speed on the GCC codebase to add the features we want than
> > it is to cooperate with the CLANG community and help them make their
> > compiler better than GCC in every test case.
> It is the classic developer/user argument. It is also stupid. The user
> side simply doesn't have the same needs, it can't understand how
> freaking hard it is sometimes to debug a large and complex program in a
> badly documented environment or worse with undocumented features. If it
> works faster ergo it is better - that is the only criteria to really
> have a meaning to a user.
It's bikeshed painting. Someone who doesn't understand the many factors
that apply, and doesn't even *want* to know, picks one thing he thinks he
understands and argues about it in an attempt to make the entire project
Well, dammit, I *like* blue, and he can take his bucket of red paint home
with him to paint his *own* bikeshed.
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
More information about the freebsd-questions