4 ms·
Tangential: I think many platforms that GCC supports and the kind of optimisation GCC provides might make it a superior choice for projects. For those developer
by legends2k 6y ago
Tangential: I think many platforms that GCC supports and the kind of optimisation GCC provides might make it a superior choice for projects. For those developers its exciting. Also if an existing project is using it for a long-time and has not intentions of switching to Clang, for them too this would be interesting.
- CoolGuySteve 6y agoMy project uses g++ but I’ve been using a clang static-analysis step in my CI pipeline for a while now. Compiling with clang is much, much slower but it finds interesting errors sometimes. I only had to ifdef out one code section that it couldn’t understand (something about indexing an array with a constexpr function returning an enum class from a template parameter). It depends on the project, but this one and another project I made work are both 100k lines of C++ and took half a day to setup. It was worth it imo.
- tele_ski 6y agoInteresting that your build times are slower with clang. I've found on most of my projects clang is roughly 30% faster to compile in debug, but release I haven't seen a huge difference between the two.
- petters 6y agoPerhaps they are slower because Clang is doing static analysis in this case.
- CoolGuySteve 6y agoStatic analysis is a lot slower but regular clang++ is also significantly slower than g++, like a 4-5 minute build time vs 2:30 on g++. It might have something to do with a heavy usage of templates in a few files, I don't know. Clang's autovectorization is better in a few functions I disassembled but otherwise the generated code doesn't benchmark any faster, it's better in some places, worse in others.
- cheez 6y agoNope, also slower for me.
- moonchild 6y agoMy build times are identical between GCC and Clang (debug and release). But TCC is 10x faster than both of them.