Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 16:33:19 +0300 From: =?utf-8?B?QW5kcml1cyBNb3JrxatuYXM=?= <hinokind@gmail.com> To: =?utf-8?Q?C=2E_Bergstr=C3=B6m?= <cbergstrom@pathscale.com> Cc: yuri@rawbw.com, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GSoC: Making ports work with clang Message-ID: <op.vb4s9tlx43o42p@klevas> In-Reply-To: <4BDEC2E3.2030305@pathscale.com> References: <op.vb0w1zrh43o42p@klevas> <4BDD28E2.8010201@rawbw.com> <op.vb3iwpzw43o42p@klevas> <20100503092213.GA1294@straylight.m.ringlet.net> <4BDEA78F.90303@pathscale.com> <op.vb4pjhux43o42p@klevas> <4BDEC2E3.2030305@pathscale.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 03 May 2010 15:34:43 +0300, C. Bergstr=C3=B6m <cbergstrom@pathsc= ale.com> wrote: > What fancy stuff is in the ports tree which clang will take advantage = of? I wasn't talking about any specific port. What I meant is that new hardw= are won't stop coming out just because FreeBSD decided not to update their g= cc. New CPUs may have new instructions and other things that are different f= rom their predecessors in one way or another. While llvm will continue to ch= ase the hardware and implement new optimizations, gcc in base will not be aw= are of those changes, continuing to produce code that runs, but may may be missing potential optimizations on those CPUs. I hope this makes sense. > I can't say the gentoo/arch approach is correct, but it may not be a b= ad > idea to steal whatever they have have done correctly. Maybe, but to steal something, I'd have to know what is "gentoo/arch approach" first. > I'd be more than happy to help or work with you if it's feasible to ad= d > another compiler to this project. Hopefully, when I finish the project it will be relatively easy to add support for other compilers. -- = Andrius
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.vb4s9tlx43o42p>