Clang Vs. GCC

The BSD's are moving to it because unlike GCC it's not licensed under the GPL.

Maybe there's some legitimate reasons besides this though?

File: 70nW6HPjE4cDCuMws.jpg (108KB, 800x1422px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 800x1422px

>>62218987
NetBSD don't give a shit and OBSD will potentially will never use it in stable as they support way more platform than clang

>>62218987
Who even uses *BSD

>>62219027
This is a big reason, but there are others. Such as easier cross-compilation and easier extensibility (a large portion of this is due to clang's code base being better-organized than GCC's)

>>62218987
It's unlikely for Linux to follow. Most other kernels switch for license reasons, while Linux is already GPL. On the technical side, Linux devs actually request features from GCC devs, so it's like they have their own custom compiler already. Even clang still struggles to support all GNU extensions. Not to say that Clang isn't a good compiler, but Linux and GCC are heavily intertwined.

>>62219376

I'd love to see GNUtards in damage control when "GNU+Linux" would become simply "Linux"..

>>62219822
we all know that won't happen anon

>>62218987
Linux "won't"
But there is already massive progress in getting the kernel compoling under clang.

>>62219831
It already did with Android.

>>62219862
android never was gnu

>>62219872
Android is Linux.

>>62220024
Android != Linux

Linux == kernel Android == OS

>>62218987
Because it's AST isn't intentionally shit

The major reasons I can think of are:
1) BSD license gives more freedom to companies so they are more incentivised to contribute (e.g. Apple)
2) GCC's ever growing scope and complexity turns off new developers
3) Clang's intermediate representation allows a much modular design and integration in applications that need this data
4) related to previous point, Clang (actually LLVM) is much more reusable because it exposed a library to integrate in e.g. a syntax checker.
5) clang dominates GCC in raw speed on some areas while GCC only has a small advantage in the other areas.
6) clang is newer while GCC has a lot of history, so clang is the "new hot thing".
7) LLVM + clang is not only a compiler but a subject of research for optimizations because of this IR.

I've been told that Clang gives better error messages than GCC, but I'm not really sure if that is true because both seemed to be roughly the same in terms of helpfulness in my experience.

>>62222127
for cpp templates it sure is quite a delight compared to gcc