Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 09:47:52 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> Cc: amd64@FreeBSD.org, toolchain@FreeBSD.org, Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@felyko.com> Subject: Re: [CFT] gcc: support for barcelona Message-ID: <C0B4C633-EC1C-41AF-BE57-76B52DF47F52@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <51A5A6F4.8000501@FreeBSD.org> References: <51A38CBD.6000702@FreeBSD.org> <E9DC99EF-F2E9-4A5F-8370-36DA25DE2C89@felyko.com> <51A3B8AB.5080808@FreeBSD.org> <521EEFA1-E116-41F5-B618-238E7AA092A8@bsdimp.com> <3C29AD82-077D-4E6B-94C7-5D069A130348__27528.1591726982$1369769859$gmane$org@FreeBSD.org> <51A5A6F4.8000501@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 29 May 2013, at 07:57, Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > In fact, I am of opinion that while such bugs exist gcc should be crowned back > as a default compiler. Seriously? Your show stopper bug is that, very occasionally, clang emits incorrect debug info? And Steve's is that clang emits code that is fully compliant with the C standard, but gives more floating point precision than he wanted? If those are the most serious problems we have with clang, then it's time to remove gcc 4.2.1 from the tree right now. I wish the problems that we had with it were so trivial... Davidhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C0B4C633-EC1C-41AF-BE57-76B52DF47F52>