On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:14:09PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >
> >And why you think it's not better then gcc?
>
> because - as you already should know - test shows otherwise.

You just ignored everything Volodymyr Kostyrko said about the other
factors that are also important for a compiler being considered "better".
Good job.  I have a hint to share with you, though:

Ignoring an argument does not make it wrong.


>
> As well as FreeBSD running predictable with gcc anyway.

. . . for some use cases, evidently including yours.  In my case, Clang's
stability and predictability is better than GCC's, and in some other
cases it may be *much* better.  In the cases where it isn't, that's a
case of standards-noncompliant code in a port causing problems, and it is
a problem that is being fixed prior to FreeBSD 10 release with Clang as
the sole compiler in the base system (last I heard).

This is what happens when you use a more standards-compliant compiler:
you get more stable and predictable behavior.

--
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@free... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@free..."