From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jan 4 11:41:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from monkeys.com (i180.value.net [206.14.136.180]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E589614D6A for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:41:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rfg@monkeys.com) Received: from monkeys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by monkeys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA87336 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2000 11:41:38 -0800 (PST) To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [OFFTOPIC] alt. C compiler In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 04 Jan 2000 11:06:17 -0800. <200001041906.LAA18457@screech.weirdnoise.com> Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 11:41:38 -0800 Message-ID: <87334.947014898@monkeys.com> From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <200001041906.LAA18457@screech.weirdnoise.com>, Ed Hall wrote: >: I have just upgraded my system to -current w/egcs 2.95.2 and I have >: several problems with it, especially when using optimizations (-O2 and >: such) > >Have you reported those problems to ? Bugs aren't >very likely to get fixed if no one reports them. > >As for free alternatives--I don't think there are any, especially if >you are looking for something "better" than the current GCC. The >various free C compilers I've seen over the years have been little >better than toys. That is *definitely* not true in the case of lcc. lcc is a very well-thought-out compiler. The good news is that lcc is *very* ANSI/ISO conformant. The bad news is that lcc is *very* ANSI/ISO conformant. The implication of the latter statement is that lcc will probably choke on many of the gcc-specific extensions in the various FreeBSD system include files. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message