Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:29:58 +0100 From: Mark Blackman <mark@exonetric.com> To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Cc: Mark Felder <feld@feld.me>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <7B54F8CE-9CA5-4C06-B3D8-F365A67A5300@exonetric.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206172212440.2506@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <4FCF9333.70201@speakeasy.org> <4FCF9C07.2000607@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206161815550.41364@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <op.wf0i64pg34t2sn@me-pc> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206172212440.2506@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 17 Jun 2012, at 21:13, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> >> Clang is consistently faster at compiling than GCC and it is very clean and modular -- not bloated. > > -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 37025016 12 cze 21:46 /usr/bin/clang > > well.. hope you just left the debugging symbols in and statically linked it… - Markhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7B54F8CE-9CA5-4C06-B3D8-F365A67A5300>