Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 07:55:17 +0530 From: Mayuresh Kathe <mayuresh@kathe.in> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Was PCC ever considered? Message-ID: <9d761b9644a40e2186ce5e7dd525bfee@kathe.in> In-Reply-To: <20190329032106.520c79ea.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <cf58b955062e3ca67764121229c73a5d@kathe.in> <20190329032106.520c79ea.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2019-03-29 07:51 AM, Polytropon wrote: > On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:07:05 +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote: >> Since FreeBSD uses Clang/LLVM (which is kind-a huge) I wondered if PCC >> was ever considered during the GCC days or even while contemplating >> the >> switch to Clang/LLVM. > > When FreeBSD evolved, it was primarily GCC that has been used > as the system compiler, so it became the standard. With Clang/LLVM > offering both evolution in compiler design and implementation, as > well as a licensing difference to GPL-based GCC, it was chosen > to be the current default. > > I think PCC wasn't on the map yet at that time... ;-) PCC wasn't on the FreeBSD map! Right? PCC has existed for a long time. >> If PCC was considered but rejected, may I know the reasons and >> rationale >> for the same? > > PCC seems to gain more attraction, primarily due to OpenBSD. > I'm not sure if this project is still alive, but I found this > statement by A. Magnusson: > > The big benefit of it (apart from that it's BSD licensed, > for license geeks :-) is that it is fast, 5-10 times faster > than gcc, while still producing reasonable code [...] > it is also quite simple to port. > > Source: > > http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070915195203&mode=expanded The project is very much alive, albeit moving quite slowly as all of the developers work only in their spare time. ~Mayuresh
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9d761b9644a40e2186ce5e7dd525bfee>