From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 22 20:14:06 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@nevdull.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D619C588 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:14:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wam@hiwaay.net) Received: from fly.hiwaay.net (fly.hiwaay.net [216.180.54.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85533F57 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:14:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wam@hiwaay.net) Received: from kabini1.local (rbn1-216-180-76-217.adsl.hiwaay.net [216.180.76.217]) (authenticated bits=0) by fly.hiwaay.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/fly) with ESMTP id t5MKE4ed001484 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 15:14:04 -0500 Message-ID: <55886C8C.4040306@hiwaay.net> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 15:20:19 -0453 From: "William A. Mahaffey III" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: "FreeBSD Questions !!!!" Subject: Re: GCC question References: <558585CB.4070607@hiwaay.net> <20150622154545.GA92373@ozzmosis.com> <55883162.8050501@hiwaay.net> <20150622163600.GD92373@ozzmosis.com> In-Reply-To: <20150622163600.GD92373@ozzmosis.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:14:06 -0000 On 06/22/15 11:42, andrew clarke wrote: > On Mon 2015-06-22 11:07:53 UTC-0453, William A. Mahaffey III (wam@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 > use 10.x. > > Whatever you read probably applied to a much older version of clang. Nope, it specifically referred to FreeBSD 10.n .... > "Last summer" is ambiguous btw. Earth has two hemispheres. Where I > live it's winter. Northern Hemisphere, (late) last summer was Aug/Sep 2014 :-) .... > Incidentally your email program's time zone is very odd. UTC-0453? > Yeah, I like my computers to report the same time I set my clocks to, which is about 6 min. fast, so I made up an oddball TZ to reflect that. It was discussed on the NetBSD-arm list, in case you want all the gory details ;-) .... -- William A. Mahaffey III ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The M1 Garand is without doubt the finest implement of war ever devised by man." -- Gen. George S. Patton Jr.