On 08/23/13 07:26, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 23/08/2013 14:06 David Chisnall said the following: >> Our gcc is from 2007. It has no C11, no C++11 support. It has bugs in its >> atomic generation so you can't use it sensibly without lots of inline >> assembly (which it doesn't support for newer architectures) for >> multithreaded things. >> >> Our libstdc++ is ancient and doesn't work with modern C++ codebases. > On the other hand these tools are perfect for building FreeBSD kernel and base. > Extrapolating my experience with base GCC I am very confident in it as a > FreeBSD development tool. > Extrapolating my experience with Clang I am not yet confident in it as a > FreeBSD development tool. > This isn't even true. As CPUs gain new features, the set of available intrinsics gets more and more ancient, requiring ever more patching, workarounds, and #ifdef. Just look at the original subject of this thread! We're just talking about the default of a make.conf setting here. Switching to clang is a long-term goal of the project for good reason. Other vendors (Apple, for instance) have made the plunge first. This seems like as good a time as any to do it. And if it goes wrong somehow, we have lots of BETAs and it is trivial to change back at any time. -NathanReceived on Fri Aug 23 2013 - 10:34:18 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:40 UTC