From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Mar 29 02:26:24 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C80E1553A40 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:26:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mout.kundenserver.de", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C8F470751 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:26:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from r56.edvax.de ([92.193.229.77]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue011 [212.227.15.167]) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 1MhDN4-1gWWtk3OcM-00eHv2; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 03:21:07 +0100 Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 03:21:06 +0100 From: Polytropon To: mayuresh@kathe.in Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Was PCC ever considered? Message-Id: <20190329032106.520c79ea.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: References: Reply-To: Polytropon Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.1 (GTK+ 2.24.5; i386-portbld-freebsd8.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:Z7bQnFf40PmK9NSwb803garVxI3Md+NuO/NGTPIrpaM2oSjR1fB SyLNqA6egfLD+Q8pSqsWuzTwtlTbHLwJfWmAZE36p5502HflCLrD2QW6INL5G2OghNBRg/T BbK8nwooGbqkAPv9+4Uwjww7hwuBmi0IWDPHbeKmm1c85sLWJR2Io8AkcQncyqISMZ1H9b/ eYpovD/evgq/9pppatXPg== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:oY7Z0n8Lp94=:ynVhkiOjvIvU92afNNc4TT kgdjIlQXAf0M0MGQvkJCbfeIR7xzRIXI4ZpYE7bxxOiPtNcHqXxfvcu7PGUMhBV5DHWTO+oqB NugiTYJ523n3U2S6j7VeoAkPFQ+21yS/ASVeYASeGDkuoXSAqrOGMjKCn5Ynl5zRk2d6mbPI0 MCMOhcwI4Ke7Kfn80MSoYX3DwKlXeZJUkQHnN1XWVJ9stYTLIGb69mk/K/r7LMJRYnwGDZHro pRGddYCRIXdMR2sxq26BEMkdDs7n6csxJV8cgZd5YN1/kMEqvktpYTvJs5Ci+CfIRN0JwASWS RjpglVN0mGXERHGkTq8wj2RX0S7Dx96y37QdLnEcY8F4QEbNUSMSDXG80OkkC5/0pLhcAUnJw 6dJauSacm9OCtrXPl9pJvXDsR07SltFM6RlAkcMZJsxxr0RSaB/2fZZ8AUDj82gUKUVf0j2AR 60wqakLO2TwPItsDIMONR+7QbkyG69ZXzx7uoz/6zUEXR8TeYONgITF/rhXsh3Wbq1RmoiWeg BDdRxO1wz5TJxI+UPzVmcmej8fwGhLLMa82imqQXOpfz5h7dySl77Qr18I2zbMixLjtOK2xFy rRG3X7Uk5zTUj11p/UfEgo23aa98TKre6pDWJ8guHnSiV3Dc1Vh9lX/iw+B1HrLgwFOH2W5Qa cd6s9ly6Y/UhO6g9GQTVsxdyRxnVhaWvfB5jk6F1IxDnoMRm7AUXEZ+gy6/5i5dld1vJfYTUZ hsXEs9VYWGfheAVoSt7AVHjvSxGjDbL8dRRn0TgnCRtT3EI312ovwuPhisM= X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1C8F470751 X-Spamd-Bar: +++++++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [7.19 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[freebsd@edvax.de]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; IP_SCORE(0.91)[ip: (4.24), ipnet: 212.227.0.0/16(-1.32), asn: 8560(1.61), country: DE(-0.01)]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: mx01.schlund.de]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[77.229.193.92.zen.spamhaus.org : 127.0.0.10]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:8560, ipnet:212.227.0.0/16, country:DE]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.97)[0.969,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[edvax.de]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.93)[0.925,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(1.00)[1.000,0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[130.126.227.212.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[130.126.227.212.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.17]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; GREYLIST(0.00)[pass,body]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[] X-Spam: Yes X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:26:24 -0000 On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:07:05 +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote: > Since FreeBSD uses Clang/LLVM (which is kind-a huge) I wondered if PCC > was ever considered during the GCC days or even while contemplating the > switch to Clang/LLVM. When FreeBSD evolved, it was primarily GCC that has been used as the system compiler, so it became the standard. With Clang/LLVM offering both evolution in compiler design and implementation, as well as a licensing difference to GPL-based GCC, it was chosen to be the current default. I think PCC wasn't on the map yet at that time... ;-) > If PCC was considered but rejected, may I know the reasons and rationale > for the same? PCC seems to gain more attraction, primarily due to OpenBSD. I'm not sure if this project is still alive, but I found this statement by A. Magnusson: The big benefit of it (apart from that it's BSD licensed, for license geeks :-) is that it is fast, 5-10 times faster than gcc, while still producing reasonable code [...] it is also quite simple to port. Source: http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070915195203&mode=expanded -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...