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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CD4734118FE04AA8A9631C9E4B108D9F>