FreeBSD Removes GCC From Default Base System 333
An anonymous reader writes "With the LLVM/Clang migration, FreeBSD developers have now disabled building GCC and the GNU C++ standard library (libstdc++) as part of the FreeBSD base system. GCC and libstdc++ have been superseded by LLVM's Clang and libc++, respectively, on primary architectures for FreeBSD 10.0."
You can still flip a few switches to get GCC, but the system compiler will still be clang. Update: 09/11 14:50 GMT by U L : Reader Noryungi noted that the What's Cooking for FreeBSD 10 page is also worth a look, adding "I have to say, this is shaping up to be a very interesting release. Bhyve [the BSD hypervisor], in particular, sounds very promising."
More interesting page for FreeBSD 10... (Score:5, Interesting)
Try this one: https://wiki.freebsd.org/WhatsNew/FreeBSD10 [freebsd.org]
I have to say, this is shaping up to be a very interesting release. Bhyve, in particular, sounds very promising...
Re:Just one question (Score:2, Interesting)
Clang is faster
Clang produces faster code
Really?
Clang has better support for C++11 than gcc
They had almost equal support for C++11 when I check earlier this year.
Clang's code base is much less convoluted than gcc's, and easier to work on
Clang's code base is more modular, which allows you to easily use separate stages of the compiler in other tools
I think that depends on the reader.
The real question is actually, why are so many people stubbornly sticking to gcc when clang has surpassed it in pretty much every way.
Because it's a good compiler. Both gcc and clang are good compilers. They didn't stop developing gcc just because clang came around and started to make progress.
Re:Just one question (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm deeply disappointed that this issue was decided over philosophical instead of technical merits. If Clang was superior to GCC in the majority of benchmarks, then I would support this decision. But that’s not the case, GCC is still leading in most benchmarks and can be an order of magnitude faster when the popular OpenMP library is used.[1] Sadly, BSD users are the losers here.
[1] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm_33svn_competes&num=5 [phoronix.com]
Re:two dictionaries say "no such word" (Score:2, Interesting)
Did you try a computer jargon dictionary? Formal dictionaries do not add jargon until it is no longer jargon.
'Performant' is not jargon because it is not used to communicate a specific technical meaning within a particular field of knowledge. It is slang: an unrecognised synonym for 'better', used by people who want to make a vaguely positive but non-specific claim. In this case, suggesting that GCC 'produces more performant code' could imply that it produces an output that executes faster, or is smaller, or is a more exact interpretation of the source with respect to the official language standards or a host of other possible claims. In other words, it's equivalent to saying 'produces better code'.
Trying so hard to use "big words" that you resort to using non-words that sound big = douche.
So what you mean to say is, "durr, people who are smarter than me are douches."
Using made-up words is not a sign of intelligence. Smart people know how, when and whether to use the more obscure parts of the English language.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
tl;dr Apple is allergic to the GPL v2, and really allergic to the GPL v3. They were never happy about gcc being their base compiler, so they've been funding the hell out of LLVM/Clang so they can use that as their base compiler instead. Apple is also the main backer of FreeBSD.