Re: Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will it become standard compiler?)

Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2009-Jan-09 19:22:38 -0800, "Pedro F. Giffuni" <giffunip_at_tutopia.com> wrote:
>   
>> - Remove gcc from the base and make the compilation depend on a packaged C.. somewhat like was made with perl.
>>     
>
> ... schnipp ...
> IMO, the
> FreeBSD base system should come complete with the necessary tools to
> build/install itself.
>
>   
I agree.
And it woukd be preferable having a fast and efficient C and/or C++
compiler.

Well, initially my question was triggered by reading a performance duell
between FreeBSD 7/8, most recent U(n)buntu and OpenSolaris and someone
stated the 3% performance gain of U(n)buntu over FreeBSD was due to the
gcc4.3 compiler, which generates more efficient code. 3% mean
performance gain could mean (as I made this experience) a better
advantage in some special cases and having in mind numerical modelling
running on my lab's FreeBSd box (yet, but I think this is about to
change and move towards a RH Linux system due to the better support of
HPC and, a pitty, our admins build the cluster with RH and not FBSD).

I'm not an expert in politics and OS development, but as far as I know,
SUN tried to extract the compiler out of the base system and failed by
doing this. In my opinion, being independend on the base system and
additionally having a very fast C compiler could also losen the tight
bindings to licensing restrictions. I never took care about GPLv2 and v3
differences but know, this seems to come to relevance in some way.

Well, as I understand the discussion about the binutils (there seems to
exist a very similar problemacy), did RH already cut off the leashes by
introducing their elftools? Correct me, if I'm wrong.

Oliver