From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun 20 14:47:40 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 ED3D11065672
	for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org>;
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:47:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from feld@feld.me)
Received: from feld.me (unknown [IPv6:2607:f4e0:100:300::2])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B01EB8FC19
	for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org>;
	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:47:39 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=feld.me;
	s=blargle; 
	h=In-Reply-To:Message-Id:From:Mime-Version:Cc:Date:References:Subject:To:Content-Type;
	bh=1n8mLWqgUo/NGQuyjmfBxrybAiYWc9/BtvwGBkToHOw=; 
	b=IylCZTociqZJjcUME3icg4wj+WDQaW3rKvA6v9kPazwvZ3bE/6ojd3t9vdXu8rL7NIIBAg6RrmD//8Q5wIFA1ZhJzn5lYu1ZHWJjjVspbltsTuIhLqjpQQc5jyKeN/zU;
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=mwi1.coffeenet.org)
	by feld.me with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD))
	(envelope-from <feld@feld.me>)
	id 1ShMBy-0003wM-8l; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:47:39 -0500
Received: from feld@feld.me by mwi1.coffeenet.org (Archiveopteryx 3.1.4)
	with esmtpa id 1340203648-94480-94479/5/16; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:47:28
	+0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
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>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1206200618290.46371@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<op.wf7ero1k34t2sn@tech304>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201642480.1476@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:47:27 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: Mark Felder <feld@feld.me>
Message-Id: <op.wf7h1df334t2sn@tech304>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201642480.1476@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.00 (FreeBSD)
X-SA-Score: -1.5
Cc: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
Subject: Re: 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 14:47:40 -0000

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:43:14 -0500, Wojciech Puchar  
<wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:

>> Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the CLANG  
>> project?
>
> because we already have great compiler - GCC. In spite of using GPL  
> licence.

GCC performs well, but it is a very messy undocumented codebase which  
makes maintaining it a nightmare. Just ask Google -- you'll find many  
others saying the same thing. It would take MORE work to get FreeBSD devs  
up to speed on the GCC codebase to add the features we want than it is to  
cooperate with the CLANG community and help them make their compiler  
better than GCC in every test case.