Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:05:34 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Vincent Hoffman <vince@unsane.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206251505320.79051@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <4FE8616D.2030002@unsane.co.uk> References: <4FCF9333.70201@speakeasy.org> <402199FE-380B-41B6-866B-7D5D66C457D5@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191952250.8234@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206200618290.46371@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <26.30.12873.06EE2EF4@smtp02.insight.synacor.com> <20120621230302.GB575@hemlock.hydra> <loom.20120624T221657-6@post.gmane.org> <1340574699711-5721495.post@n5.nabble.com> <loom.20120625T143324-756@post.gmane.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206251453070.78793@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <4FE8616D.2030002@unsane.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> >> If it would be truly about removing GPLv3 code that hurts, replacing >> libstdc++ would be first thing to do. > I assume you mean like the new libc++? > http://wiki.freebsd.org/NewC%2B%2BStack yes. this is actually GREAT MOVE! even if it's slower, object oriented languages are not about speed anyway. This should be done first, not compiler. Compiler - only after actually better would exist.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206251505320.79051>