Quote Originally Posted by systemd rulez View Post
What BADCODE is saying is that these benchmarks can be attempted to be used by BSD zealots to advocate that gcc is a failure and clang is better since gcc narrowly beat clang in this test which is a joke as it's puting an outdated version of GCC against A New version of Clang.
Then compare it with a new version of GCC, like in the article Michael linked to. You won't see that much difference. And when it is clearly stated that there are no benchmarks of OpenMP software because OpenMP is currently not supported by Clang/LLVM then no one that is able to read will believe that Clang is better.
By the way, nobody is saying that, as we can clearly see in the benchmarks with the newer versions there are cases where GCC is better and other cases where Clang/LLVM is better.
The only one insisting that one of them clearly is better are you.

By the way, still waiting for an answer from you in the thread where you claimed that Apple has implemented surveillance technology into Clang/LLVM (although I doubt I get one, since all your claims are made up).