From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 29 08:48:14 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: toolchain@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A029543; Wed, 29 May 2013 08:48:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org) Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A7F96BB; Wed, 29 May 2013 08:48:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (cpc27-cmbg15-2-0-cust235.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com [86.27.188.236]) (authenticated bits=0) by theravensnest.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4T8lvdG047507 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 29 May 2013 08:48:00 GMT (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) Subject: Re: [CFT] gcc: support for barcelona From: David Chisnall In-Reply-To: <51A5A6F4.8000501@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 09:47:52 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <51A38CBD.6000702@FreeBSD.org> <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> To: Andriy Gapon X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Cc: amd64@FreeBSD.org, toolchain@FreeBSD.org, Pedro Giffuni , Rui Paulo X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 08:48:14 -0000 On 29 May 2013, at 07:57, Andriy Gapon 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... David