From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 1 22:21:58 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2967106566B for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 22:21:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions@herveybayaustralia.com.au) Received: from mail.unitedinsong.com.au (mail.unitedinsong.com.au [150.101.178.33]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636CD8FC15 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 22:21:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au (laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au [192.168.0.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.unitedinsong.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 05C495C29 for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 08:35:33 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <4F78D505.5020905@herveybayaustralia.com.au> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 08:21:57 +1000 From: Da Rock User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111109 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <4F76DD24.4060104@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20120331135624.GA46283@ozzmosis.com> <20343.7837.796535.407848@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20120401073525.1c05bc0f@cox.net> <20344.21184.853321.579064@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20120401130201.272897fc@cox.net> In-Reply-To: <20120401130201.272897fc@cox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: using clang X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2012 22:21:58 -0000 On 04/02/12 04:02, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > On Sun, 1 Apr 2012 09:06:08 -0400 > Robert Huff wrote: > >> Conrad J. Sabatier writes: >> >>> Note, too, that none of these exceptions have anything to do with >>> my /usr/src builds. I've been using clang for buildworld and >>> buildkernel for quite some time now. >> I've heard that, but I think I'll wait until it becomes the >> official default. :-) > I can well understand your hesitation. I didn't jump on the clang > bandwagon for a good while myself, either. > > But, from examining and comparing clang's assembly language output > against gcc's, it does seem pretty apparent that clang produces > some pretty darned efficient code, frequently using notably fewer > machine instructions than gcc, so I try to use it now as much as > possible. I also find its error and warning messages to be much more > precise and informative than gcc's, which is a real boon if you do any > coding yourself. Tell me about it. I just found the real reason why libreoffice is failing when it gets to tests... :) > > There's that, plus the fact that the base system's version of gcc (4.2) > doesn't fully support my processor family type (amdfam10), whereas > clang does (although, to be fair, gcc 4.6+ does as well). > >>> Hope this helps somewhat. :-) >> Very much. >> Thank you. > You'll come around eventually, no doubt. :-) >