Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Google Chrome Switched To The Clang Compiler On Linux

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

  • Why Google Chrome Switched To The Clang Compiler On Linux

    Phoronix: Why Google Chrome Switched To The Clang Compiler On Linux

    Since a few months back Google switched from GCC to Clang for compiling their production builds of the Chrome web-browser on Linux. A Google developer has now shed some light on the switch with backing up their own reasons for switching to Clang...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    "The two main reasons for switching over to Clang as the default Linux compiler for Chrome came down to ............."

    Wanting to implement DRM and making proprietary compiler extensions without sharing back the code.

    Comment


    • #3
      not Google

      You can accuse Google of many things but of keeping things proprietary you really can't I think. MS likes ( do I really need to give examples of proprietary MS tech ? ) to do it and so does Apple ( swift is a close source language ) but Google usually open sources most of the tech. They've made codecs open, Android is also open source ...
      Google probably feels it's easier to take Clang where they want it rather than GCC. I couldn't give a sh*t about Clang for Linux because I think GCC does a good job but if someone is really interested in improving Clang for Windows that would be nice as MinGW is not that good.

      Comment


      • #4
        google can't even into linux at all, they can't upgrade GCC 4.9 to 4.9 LOL

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by stan View Post
          "The two main reasons for switching over to Clang as the default Linux compiler for Chrome came down to ............."

          Wanting to implement DRM and making proprietary compiler extensions without sharing back the code.
          Let's be fair here, NaCl and PNaCl have been on the horizon for close to a decade now so it should come as no surprise for Google to switch to clang for Chrome.

          I'm actually surprised they haven't switched to clang company wide. I guess that's only a matter of time.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by chris200x9 View Post
            google can't even into linux at all, they can't upgrade GCC 4.9 to 4.9 LOL
            Coherent writing is always welcome.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mcirsta View Post
              You can accuse Google of many things but of keeping things proprietary you really can't I think. MS likes ( do I really need to give examples of proprietary MS tech ? ) to do it and so does Apple ( swift is a close source language ) but Google usually open sources most of the tech. They've made codecs open, Android is also open source ...
              Google probably feels it's easier to take Clang where they want it rather than GCC. I couldn't give a sh*t about Clang for Linux because I think GCC does a good job but if someone is really interested in improving Clang for Windows that would be nice as MinGW is not that good.
              Everything you cite Google doing, Apple has already done.

              Sorry, but any halfwit can figure out that GCC is becoming a disease with the GPLv3 and beyond.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by chris200x9 View Post
                google can't even into linux at all, they can't upgrade GCC 4.9 to 4.9 LOL
                indeed...

                Comment


                • #9
                  "Easiest way forward" Haha.

                  In order words, for no particular reason, one of their engineers just thought it would be cool and made up a nonsense reason.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Indeed. The blog post can be restated more succinctly by simply saying "we switched to Clang because we like it".

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X