Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Jun 2012 19:30:23 +0200 (CEST)
From:      Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To:        "Robison, Dave" <david.robison@fisglobal.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Why Clang
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211929540.5130@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
In-Reply-To: <4FE35745.9060601@fisglobal.com>
References:  <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> <20120621015237.GB58187@neutralgood.org> <AC6A916E-066B-4399-89E1-90C2394327E7@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <4FE35208.40708@queernet.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211907470.4170@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <4FE35745.9060601@fisglobal.com>

index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail

> Because there's no reason to do that. It's an asinine suggestion.
>
> Clang is here to stay. Most of us are happy about that decision. GCC

Because most that are not already stopped and ignored thing. and use GCC.

Politics won.


home | help

Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211929540.5130>