Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LLVM Clang 3.4 Compiler Performance Is Doing Good

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by zester View Post
    If you wan't to turn this discussion into a situation were we go back and forth insulting each other, I'm not interested.




    The only argument with your statement that I can offer is that my definition of Freedom is comparable to that of Free Speech, I may not like everything that people say
    but I wouldn't restrict there freedom to protect them from saying it or others from hearing it. With true freedom there is positives and negatives.

    I have no doubt that Apple and M$ take and use BSD code, but does that really matter? Look at what Android has done to there profits and market-share. Granted I don't particularly like to be associated with Android per my prejudice against "Java",but I will take Androids success as a win for the good guys.

    Lastly don't let your self become so filled with the hatred for all things "proprietary" that you inadvertently become what you tryed so hard not to become a "slave".




    LLVM isn't an Apple project its sponsored by Apple and many many others. Their not tricking anyone into doing anything. It's simple a difference of opinion, in regards to what true software freedom is. Kde, Qt, Gnome, Nvidia, Mesa, .... all have a stake in LLVM.

    GCC served its purpose, but LLVM is what's going to replace it.
    To be clear, the vast direction and financial sponsorship for LLVM is from Apple, followed by Google, with Targets sponsorships for platforms by many hands in the pot from SONY, ARM, ImgTec [MIPS], Nvidia, AMD, etc.

    Clang, LLDB, Compiler-RT, Libc++ all were heavy lifted by Apple and continue to be so, with the usual support from all the individuals and backed corporate presence for each and every architect.

    FreeBSD folks are quite well represented and ecstatic that this project is evolving as it continues to do so.

    GCC is the relic.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by zester View Post
      See my post above in regards to righteous, and your wrong on both accounts a compiler does nether. But in the US both "Good and Well" are appropriate in this context.

      My father is in "Good" health.
      My father is doing "Well"

      The Compiler is in "Good" health.
      The compiler is doing "Well"

      In the US both "Good" and "Well" are not normally mutually exclusive.
      I live in the US, and that is definitely wrong. I'm not enough of a grammar nazi to know what the correct terminology for those kinds of phrases are, but notice how you are using them very differently in your examples. "in good health" vs "doing well". One is an adverb modifying health, while the other is not. Michael used it the wrong way. Your examples are the correct way.

      Also, righteous might be a slang term for being good, but it's the kind of slang you'd see in blaxploitation movies from the '80s. Not anything anyone would have ever heard in real life these days. It's so disconnected from common speech that it didn't even connect at first, until i read your post. It means virtuous today - but more like, a warrior who is righteous. It's often associated with anger, or intense emotions at least, and has a very strong moral connotation.

      My mistake that Michael isn't a native english speaker. That actually explains a lot. I'd wondered that a few times in the past, but i knew he lived in the US so i just assumed he was a native speaker.
      Last edited by smitty3268; 12-23-2013, 10:36 PM.

      Comment

      Working...
      X