Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Jun 2012 22:30:23 +0200 (CEST)
From:      Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To:        Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Why Clang
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206182228220.88997@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
In-Reply-To: <201206182014.q5IKEVdQ014212@mail.r-bonomi.com>
References:  <201206182014.q5IKEVdQ014212@mail.r-bonomi.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> scratch and this resulted with thing 5 times larger,
>
> *YOUR* measurement of sizes was faulty.  <grin>

be more exact.

>> old bloated gcc is just funny.
>
> You _do_ understand that they could not use -any- of the technology
> implementations in GCC, that they had to redevelop everything from
> scratch, right?

even stated this.

> I'm sure that you _also_ are aware that a larger program size does *NOT*
> necessarily mean 'bloat'.

of course. really i can write programs.

and really - i don't understand all this fuss about "better error 
reporting".

Really i don't have problems to read gcc error messages when i compile my 
programs.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206182228220.88997>