Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: LLVM's Clang Is Finally The FreeBSD x86 Compiler

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,125

    Default LLVM's Clang Is Finally The FreeBSD x86 Compiler

    Phoronix: LLVM's Clang Is Finally The FreeBSD x86 Compiler

    After talking about FreeBSD's transition to Clang as the default C/C++ compiler rather than GCC, the move has finally happened where for x86/x86_64 systems the LLVM-based compiler has replaced GCC...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTIyMzM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    220

    Default

    So FreeBSD is, as always, faster than the Linux guys.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhux View Post
    So FreeBSD is, as always, faster than the Linux guys.
    Actually, after this change, it will be slower :P

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    220

    Default

    Why should it?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    21

    Default

    I would like to see a benchmark (also on Linux) with with normal compiler settings (-O2 or -Os ... . flags binary distributions are using).

    Most of the GCC vs. clang benchmarks on this site are totally useless, because only a few people in the world compile their software with those unstable flags (-O3 -march=native -ffast-math, ...).

    It would be nice to see how the compilers perform on more common flags, like -O2 and -Os without CPU-specific optimizations.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Actually, after this change, it will be slower :P
    This change is an improvement over GCC 4.2.x, which is what FreeBSD was using previously.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhux View Post
    Why should it?
    Because compiling faster and using less RAM, doesn't mean the end result of this compilation is better performing for any reason. It could be, but it is indicated it's not. Tiny C Compiler can probably use much less time and RAM than Clang, too ..

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ryao View Post
    This change is an improvement over GCC 4.2.x, which is what FreeBSD was using previously.
    I would like to see actual numbers. I think it is still not the case for common benchmarks.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ryao View Post
    This change is an improvement over GCC 4.2.x, which is what FreeBSD was using previously.
    But he said "faster than Linux", and Linux distros have all moved beyond 4.2.x

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rigaldo View Post
    It could be, but it is indicated it's not.
    Where do you see the indication here?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •