GCC 5 Is Compiling Faster, But Still Falls Short Of Clang

[Guest]

And why should I wait 2-3x times longer to get my binary, only because gcc is 5% faster in some insane compiler flags I can never ever ship to my customers?

Why should I care how fast my new function is? The first thing I want to know while writing and compiling code is "Does it work?", "Are there errors?", "Where are the errors?", "What is wrong?" and "Are there errors that are not visible to me right now?".

You should, because 5 FPS makes a huge improvement for some people. As a customer why should I care if you compiled your project in five or eight hours? It's a nonsense to use a slower compiler. Clang could be used in development, but not in a final compilation.

[-MacNuke-]

Well, why did you compile everything from scratch? Sounds like componentizing your software would be a far more efficient way to save time than using a faster compiler...

Change a header file in some Utility-Function/Class/Component/whatever and you have to rebuild a lot of code. Or get an update from a library you use (boost, SDL, ...) than also a shitload of code has to get recompiled.

[-MacNuke-]

You should, because 5 FPS makes a huge improvement for some people. As a customer why should I care if you compiled your project in five or eight hours? It's a nonsense to use a slower compiler.

GCC is only faster if you compile the exacly for one CPU... so... guess what customers do not want... compile the code for themself for every CPU they own. They want to use the application, not benchmark it.

Clang could be used in development, but not in a final compilation.

So GCC is useless for development... But really... GCC is not THAT much faster than clang. Just a litte if you compile for one CPU...

[-MacNuke-]

ccache greatly reduces the recompilation time.

Yeah, even more when used with clang

[mike4]

The BSD license is interesting when you're working on closed source project.

Bloody nonsense, stop troling. Your code = the licence you choose.

[brosis]

Bloody nonsense, stop troling. Your code = the licence you choose.

You are who writes non-sense.
1) BSD differs from GPL only in copyleft. Copyleft differs from open-source by adding restrictions to ability to add restrictions.
2.1) GPL was created precisely to prevent closing down of the GNU (GNU Not Unit) - a rewrite of Unix userland by Stallman and Co.
2.2) BSD went completely other path and took existing proprietary Unix. Hence their license (BSD) were geared towards compability with closed source.

Unless one wants to incorporate software in closed-source model as well, there is absolutely no need for BSD.

[brosis]

You are just proving what he said.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_Can't_Touch_This

"U Can't Touch This" is a hit single written, produced and performed by MC Hammer from his 1990 album, Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em."

2014-1990 = 24.

You fail while failing.

[brosis]

Bloody nonsense, stop troling. Your code = the licence you choose.

Also, you point to nonsense, but picking a license due to "your code=the license you choose" (my burger = my way to make it ) is a contradiction to "your goals =the license your choose" ( my hunger = my way to make it ) in matter that former disspells any logic.

License choice is based on logic/goals of author for his code, and not on "if my_code==true then random(license)".


Also, as open projects work not only by author input, but also by contributions from other members, the wording "my code = the license I choose" is de facto link to proprietary code.


Well done.

[mike4]

This is for people that think around corners it seems.

The license is NOT compiler dependant, of course.

Also it only makes sense to test for compiled app speed, not for compiler speed.

[Veerappan]

Also it only makes sense to test for compiled app speed, not for compiler speed.

No, no, no. Spend enough time developing on large projects and you will welcome any compiler speed improvements you can get.

If the compiled code can be roughly the same performance, then why wouldn't you want a faster compiler with better error reporting and better integration with your dev environment. Add in how easy it is to hack on llvm (e.g. adding in new language support), and the only thing that I use GCC for anymore is the apps that won't build on clang in Linux because they've been written assuming GCC-specific features.

Almost any time that I can sit down to work on my hobby project, I first have to spend 45 minutes pulling updates and recompiling. If I can cut that to 25, I will and have