Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On 17 Jun 2012, at 21:13, Wojciech Puchar wrote:

>>=20
>> Clang is consistently faster at compiling than GCC and it is very =
clean and modular -- not bloated.
>=20
> -r-xr-xr-x  3 root  wheel  37025016 12 cze 21:46 /usr/bin/clang
>=20
> well..

hope you just left the debugging symbols in and statically linked it=85

- Mark=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7B54F8CE-9CA5-4C06-B3D8-F365A67A5300>