On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 01:01:00PM -0700, Rui Paulo wrote: > On 28 May 2013, at 12:54, Steve Kargl <s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> > wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 07:10:23PM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > >> On 28 May 2013, at 18:40, Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote: > >> > >>> That's not going to happen soon. While it works OK for amd64, there's > >>> still many bugs in its ARM support and even more in its MIPS support. > >>> There's 0 chance it will be gone in 10... > >> > >> I disagree. There is a significant chance that gcc in base > >> will be gone for all Tier 1 platforms in 10.0. There are > >> still some reasons to want gcc installed, but there are no > >> compelling reasons to want an ancient version of gcc installed > >> on x86[-64] or ARM. For people who need gcc, the ports > >> collection provides a selection of recent versions. > >> > > > > I surely hope not! Until the individuals pushing the > > change to clang actually tests clang on floating point > > intensive applications, it is IMHO dubious to even have > > clang as the default compiler. Just the latest example: > > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-numerics/2013-May/000354.html > > Have you, or anyone else, filed bug reports at http://llvm.org/bugs/ ? >
I haven't submitted this bug. Given the attention that another bug that I pointed out, I have little interest in submitting other bugs. Ed Schouten submitted the bug report after I pointed out clang cannot do complex arithmetic correctly under certain circumstances. http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=8532 -- Steve _______________________________________________ freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-toolchain-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
