geeky OT stuff: clang 5 vs. gcc 7.2

[Kevin Funk]

On Wednesday, 15 November 2017 10:36:38 CET René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Maybe only sideways related (it could affect how well KDevelop is built?):

You already mentioned it, it's off-topic really. Especially on the KDevelop 
user-centric mailing list.

I don't think we have the capability to judge which compiler is in the lead 
here. Not to mention just optimizing for compactness of code leaves out all 
other (potentially more interesting) program optimizations.

You should check out the numerous benchmarks that test GCC vs Clang out there 
(i.e. on Phoronix).

Regards,
Kevin

> I just noticed LLVM 5.0 (actually -almost- 5.0.1) packages for my system on
> LLVM.org and could resist installing them to get my own idea what that
> intriguing major version step is all about. All I can say at the moment is
> that building with "-O3 -g" leads to significantly more compact binaries
> using clang than using GCC. Comparisons on sites like phoronix often
> suggest significant advantages to using clang both in build times and
> performance of the resulting binaries but I've rarely been able to
> reproduce that. The contrary, rather, and as far as I can tell even build
> times are somewhat shorter with GCC 7.2 than with clang 4.0 .
> 
> What are the experiences here? In particular, is there a noticeable
> advantage to building KDevelop with clang (be it 5 or 4 but I'd be curious
> to know also if clang 5 is really better than 4 in real life).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> R.


-- 
Kevin Funk | kfunk at kde.org | http://kfunk.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop/attachments/20171115/f9f71b97/attachment.sig>