mail at ozzmosis.com
Mon Jun 22 16:36:04 UTC 2015
On Mon 2015-06-22 11:07:53 UTC-0453, William A. Mahaffey III (wam at hiwaay.net) wrote:
> I found some sources online last summer when I built this box that said
> clang produced worse code than gcc, that's most of the reason I went w/
> 9.3R rather than 10.n, which are clang based, as I understand things. I
> guess I am good to go now, then, thanks :-) ....
I think you'll find 10.x is no slower than 9.x. Otherwise nobody would
Whatever you read probably applied to a much older version of clang.
"Last summer" is ambiguous btw. Earth has two hemispheres. Where I
live it's winter.
Incidentally your email program's time zone is very odd. UTC-0453?
More information about the freebsd-questions