Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GCC6 Is Bringing More Helpful Warnings For Developers

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

  • GCC6 Is Bringing More Helpful Warnings For Developers

    Phoronix: GCC6 Is Bringing More Helpful Warnings For Developers

    While Clang has long been talked about as producing better warnings/errors and diagnostics than the GNU Compiler Collection, the GCC developers have been ramping up their error/warning reporting to be more helpful to developers in debugging compile-time issues. GCC 5 had brought a number of improvements on this front while GCC 6 will be even more helpful...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...6-New-Warnings

  • #2
    Clang has long been talked about as producing better warnings/errors and diagnostics than GCC 4.2, since apple has no gpl3 gcc

    Comment


    • #3
      GCC6 makes it any easier to extract the abstract syntax tree for Emacs auto completion/syntax highlighting/code refactoring?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by pal666 View Post
        Clang has long been talked about as producing better warnings/errors and diagnostics than GCC 4.2, since apple has no gpl3 gcc
        It wasn't very clear what you were trying to say, so allow me to rephrase.

        GCC warnings/diagnostic messages were improved drastically during the 4.x cycle, as a result of the competition from clang, and are no longer bad at all. So complaining about this old issue is silly, when it was fixed a long time ago.

        You still see a lot of clang vs gcc comparisons out there talking about the latest clang 3.8 vs gcc - they fail to mention it's gcc4.2 instead of gcc5 because that's all Apple puts on their systems - and that's not a fair comparison at all.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post

          It wasn't very clear what you were trying to say, so allow me to rephrase.

          GCC warnings/diagnostic messages were improved drastically during the 4.x cycle, as a result of the competition from clang, and are no longer bad at all. So complaining about this old issue is silly, when it was fixed a long time ago.

          You still see a lot of clang vs gcc comparisons out there talking about the latest clang 3.8 vs gcc - they fail to mention it's gcc4.2 instead of gcc5 because that's all Apple puts on their systems - and that's not a fair comparison at all.

          This is the info I come to phoronix to learn. Thank you much, glad to know.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by pal666 View Post
            Clang has long been talked about as producing better warnings/errors and diagnostics than GCC 4.2, since apple has no gpl3 gcc
            Even gcc 4.3 is better than gcc 4.2. That stuff is old. Fortunately you could just build a newer gcc on Macs, Apple just didn't like it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
              It wasn't very clear what you were trying to say
              sorry, i was limited by quote

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by carewolf View Post
                Even gcc 4.3 is better than gcc 4.2. That stuff is old. Fortunately you could just build a newer gcc on Macs, Apple just didn't like it.
                I don't think you even need to build it yourself. Homebrew can do it for you.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by unixfan2001 View Post

                  I don't think you even need to build it yourself. Homebrew can do it for you.
                  Yet, these days even *buntus are using gcc like 5.2-5.3, and 4.2 is really retarded compared to these. As for apple, their refusal of GPLv3 serves as a good indication they're just a bunch of treacherous bastards who have nothing to do with opensource and only care about hardcore DRM/proprietary pwnage of their (L)users. Have fun dealing with this company, etc. It going to be pleasant company. For apple.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by SystemCrasher View Post
                    Yet, these days even *buntus are using gcc like 5.2-5.3, and 4.2 is really retarded compared to these. As for apple, their refusal of GPLv3 serves as a good indication they're just a bunch of treacherous bastards who have nothing to do with opensource and only care about hardcore DRM/proprietary pwnage of their (L)users. Have fun dealing with this company, etc. It going to be pleasant company. For apple.
                    Seriously? Is there something wrong with your brain? Why the heck would you go on a tangent over my pointing out how to best install Homebrew?
                    I don't know why you feel the need to post a freaking GPL3 (which, btw, is generally not well embraced. Even GPL2 proponents hate it. Linus included) rant wherever I go!

                    PS: In case you haven't figured it out yet. The GPL isn't somehow the epitome of open source. There are other licenses, as well. In fact, most GPL proponents (including the FSF) seem to prefer the term "free software" and aren't particularly fond of "open source".
                    Last edited by unixfan2001; 02-22-2016, 02:51 AM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X