Quote Originally Posted by Awesomeness View Post
This is what I do not understand about this policy: Why not let the packager decide which compiler works better for the package?
imagine the anarchic mess resulting of bugs report present in LLVM/Gcc and not present in the other that without account possible abi breaks, longer time to fix bugs or the dude maintaing the package simply got bored and leave the package unmaintained and the next one have to figure out how to solve stuff from clang/llvm since not much ppl is experienced with it unlike gcc.

beside clang/llvm don't have feature parity with gcc nor offers better performance (i don't mean cute build logs i mean AVX/FMA, PGO, LTO, Graphite, OpenMP(<--for god sakes), etc).

beside this is a policy for main distro packagers it doesn't mean you can download clang and compile your X favorite app with it and publish in your X prefered Repo.

llvm/clang is a nice project but is not prime time ready nor is ready to replace GCC at least for 2 more years