Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 17:05:39 +1000 From: "Dewayne Geraghty" <dewayne.geraghty@heuristicsystems.com.au> To: "'Doug Barton'" <dougb@freebsd.org>, "'Randy Bush'" <randy@psg.com> Cc: 'FreeBSD Stable' <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: clang tautology Message-ID: <CD4734118FE04AA8A9631C9E4B108D9F@white> In-Reply-To: <4FC45139.70108@FreeBSD.org> References: <m2ehq3snv5.wl%randy@psg.com> <m262bfsl5q.wl%randy@psg.com> <4FC45139.70108@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Good point Doug, I guess the choice between a clang 3.1 and gcc 4.2.1 world/kernel is pending a performance profile comparison. The performance comparison using specific applications (ports) indicates some improvement of gcc 4.6 over 4.2 and certainly gains when openMP is advantageous. Regards, Dewayne.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CD4734118FE04AA8A9631C9E4B108D9F>