From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun 20 12:17:48 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1277E1065688
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:17:48 +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 6FD948FC12
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:17:47 +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 q5KCHl7C024496;
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:17:47 +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
	q5KCHls8024493; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:17:47 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:17:47 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: Peter Ulrich Kruppa <ulrich@pukruppa.de>
In-Reply-To: <4FE1BD0E.5060300@pukruppa.de>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201416540.24484@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
References: <4FCF9333.70201@speakeasy.org>
	<402199FE-380B-41B6-866B-7D5D66C457D5@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
	<CAH3a3KWKNF5Bt-8=KgtbMh=rV6GfUO7OaeE6-SutxkcRe8cG3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191953280.8234@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<20120619205225.21d6709f.freebsd@edvax.de>
	<20f61898ce668c96f8882981cf8e24f6@remailer.privacy.at>
	<4FE1AD27.8000704@gmail.com>
	<CAH3a3KWHYC+pbkdQWF4Pfqv=W0Ldzo8q4T8Ta5wgsryocxNFuA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1340192731894-5720039.post@n5.nabble.com>
	<4FE1BD0E.5060300@pukruppa.de>
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 14:17:47 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Why Clang
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 12:17:48 -0000

>> Nothing wrong with productive flaming for me,
>> but it's just not typical code of conduct in FreeBSD
>> mailing list at all.
> Actually I can't remember any flame-war about system compilers - this is the 
> first one.

because such situation like now never happened - changing C compiler to 
much worse because of political reasons.

> But I believe it is a good proof, that clang is a serious alternative to gcc 
it is only a proof that it was decided to put it as FreeBSD default 
compiler.