Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 15:29:18 -0500 From: Mark Felder <feld@feld.me> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <op.wf0i64pg34t2sn@me-pc> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206161815550.41364@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <4FCF9333.70201@speakeasy.org> <4FCF9C07.2000607@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206161815550.41364@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 11:17:19 -0500, Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote: > and - at least for now - clang itself is very slow. But produces not > worse (or better) code than gcc. Clang is consistently faster at compiling than GCC and it is very clean and modular -- not bloated.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.wf0i64pg34t2sn>