On 19/08/16 09:25, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 18/08/16 19:37, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
On 18/08/16 19:29, Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 08/18/2016 02:24 PM, Anna Szekér wrote:
Witch compiler would you compare it to?
A reasonable comparison would be the Oracle Studio 12.5 compiler which
creates wonderfully optimal code on both Sparc and x86 architectures.
If somebody writes a nice comparison in the style of
http://clang.llvm.org/comparison.html
But hopefully slightly less self serving.
To be honest, it doesn't seem an unfair characterization to me.
GCC could highlight the ethical and tit-for-tat benefits of the GPL, but I
guess they do not see those as a benefit.
GCC has also the benefit of being a more mature code base and, as a result, it
has been more thoroughly tested in a wider range of codes; yet this is
difficult to quantify and arguably Clang is more widely used today than GCC,
just not in Linux, thus this might not be true anymore.
Is there anything else there that you think is misleading or plain wrong?
Cheers,
Manuel.
