From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun 20 04:26:21 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 760A11065673
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 04:26:21 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.99])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D94A58FC14
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 04:26:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5K4QD4a070961;
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 06:26:14 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost)
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id
	q5K4QDHR070958; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 06:26:13 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 06:26:13 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: Michel Talon <talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
In-Reply-To: <854D02B1-CA89-4F5E-8773-DB05F2868D74@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206200618290.46371@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
References: <402199FE-380B-41B6-866B-7D5D66C457D5@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191952250.8234@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<854D02B1-CA89-4F5E-8773-DB05F2868D74@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
	(wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [127.0.0.1]);
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 06:26:14 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 04:26:21 -0000

i tested your test program, and in that case, contrary to testing common 
unix programs, difference is far higher showing gcc superiority.

i did this test with FreeBSD 9 supplied clang and FreeBSD 9 supplied gcc.

clearly shows that clang actually cannot do more agressive optimization 
(that trades space) at all, and at -O2 is far slower.




produced:

-rwxr-xr-x  1 tmp  tmp  11168 20 cze 06:18 test.cc.O2
-rwxr-xr-x  1 tmp  tmp  17024 20 cze 06:18 test.cc.O3
-rwxr-xr-x  1 tmp  tmp  17024 20 cze 06:18 test.cc.O9
-rwxr-xr-x  1 tmp  tmp  11096 20 cze 06:18 test.clang.O2
-rwxr-xr-x  1 tmp  tmp  11096 20 cze 06:18 test.clang.O3


cc.O2:


real    0m2.877s
user    0m2.829s
sys     0m0.030s

cc.O3:

real    0m2.142s
user    0m2.131s
sys     0m0.000s


cc.09:

real    0m2.071s
user    0m2.054s
sys     0m0.008s


clang.O2:

real    0m3.440s
user    0m3.405s
sys     0m0.018s

clang.O3:

real    0m3.217s
user    0m3.205s
sys     0m0.001s




How about leaving politics and getting back to technical grounds?

>From what i know now GPLv3 isn't really a problem for us, your may freely 
distribute binary only software compiled by latest gcc.