4 ms·
What is the status of ubsan, msan, tsan and others support for GCC though? Last time I checked they were a bit behind. I agree GCC make clang obscolete regardin
by hi_herbert 4y ago
What is the status of ubsan, msan, tsan and others support for GCC though?
Last time I checked they were a bit behind.
I agree GCC make clang obscolete regarding C++ support and even performance.
I don't know a comprehensive alternative to clang linter but I'm sure there are a few.
Given that llvm receive more human resources than gcc by far, I once expected it to outperform gcc generally (e.g support for polyhedral optimizations, BOLT, etc)
Unfortunately weirdly it seems llvm performance is mostly stagnant. I personally suspect we are reaching increasingly diminishing returns with AOT and that the performance graal would be a hybrid that also does JIT at runtime (beyond PGO therefore) and more interpretable than BOLT
- ghosty141 4y agoAt work GCC is a lot slower than clang, the project uses a bit much template magic but still, clang is faster. Where does this GCC is faster thing come from? I personally havent experienced it
- pyler 4y agoOld hype thing created by gcc fanboys :) They always claims so.
- hi_herbert 4y agoI mean faster runtime performance, I have no clue about compilation time. Well I'm basing this on the countless benchmarks I've seen, e.g. on phoronix over the decade. Also you have to understand that Clang -O2 is (was) "unfair" as GCC did not enable autovectorization until -O3. This has (is being?) changed.