Gcc or clang?

clang is life

tcc

well your life fucking sucks

icc

i use my own compiler

wrong person. gcc is over there, fäm

>fäm
söyboy detected

nöpé, nöt réàlly. whërė iš yoūr prõōf¿

compile linux on clang

clang is not free
so the choice is clear

Attached: 1524138213958.jpg (750x500, 60K)

clang error messages are better and it's smaller in size

They're both shitheaps, but they're different shitheaps.

In the long run I think LLVM will win out over GCC. There are difficulties with both, such as if you need to ensure all copies of data are destroyed, but that's a rabbit hole that only begins with destructors and ends in EEPROM, hardware design and a deep abiding hatred of caches.

CLANG

Who else MSVC?

GPL is not free. It forces the distribution of source.

That's fascism fascist.

This
Don't depend on GCC exclusive behavior, nor GNUisms
Neither should you depend on exclusive behavior of anything else nor random shit, stick to standards that aren't completely retarded

visual studio :^)

gcc is obsolete and deprecated only used by neckbeards living in their mom's basement

Big companies like Apple, Intel and Sony use clang

>_s

Attached: pedro.jpg (1000x1438, 259K)

Clang because of the license

You aren't forced to license your software as GPL. Obviously if you choose the GPL you want to distribute source in the first place.

clang is for chads
gcc is for virgins

its the obvious choice

Everyone on Jow Forums is a virgin so we all use Jow Forumscc.

musl or glibc?

Attached: 1524293174342.gif (333x187, 1021K)

>clang
is it pronounced see-lang, seal-ang, or klang?

The plan9 c compiler unironically.

icc

Attached: screenshot.jpg (316x424, 18K)

clang actually has a much cleaner internal design, gcc is a monolithic pile of shit.

I just want to apologise for saying your life fucking sucks.

Possible. Google clang like they lost huge money because gcc was in the android toolchain. Fucking trash.

Attached: 60e2fa2d781867fb71bf75a778ca23accc072f9cbd61a1ac158cc948da338def.jpg (493x600, 95K)

gcc
clang are for faggots

they're basically the same 2bh

clan/g/ is superior

iar

clang is the future Stallman's autism couldn't handle

Attached: oops-lol.png (900x875, 54K)

I have my packet management configured to explicitly disallow any gpl3-cancer licensed packages. Clang it is then.

Poor craftsmen blame their tools.

10 rupees have been deposited to your iTunes account.

Attached: 1512190043014.png (1069x1081, 812K)

Clang, at least during development.
It compiles so much faster that it isn't funny.
Also make sure to use lld as the linker, I swear it's at least 10 times faster than ld.

>t. bitter, lazy programmer who likes to steal BSD licensed code

gcc

hey that's pretty cool.

Both are free but clang have proprietary extension(s) and pushed by PRISM companies

This. Passing it through both is good to ensure you catch the most issues. Only release source and let everyone compile using whatever the fuck they want.

J A V A C

Attached: 1511640763900.jpg (1813x2377, 289K)

>clang is deprecated
What?

Also, are there any distros that exclusively use clang?
I wish Void did, but it's on GCC.

Definitely MUSL, but needs to be more widespread

>are there any distros that exclusively use clang?
can't build the kernel without gcc. openbsd uses clang as it's C compiler though.

Attached: linus-torvalds.jpg (221x336, 16K)

g++

>can't build the kernel without gcc
I'm ok with compromising there.
I build my own anyway.

>OpenBSD
Too ancient. No TRIM

doesn't matter as long as you dont use msvc

>I build my own
BWAHAHAHAHA

I overall like clang better, but both are fine.

You could essentially do this on Gentoo.

But when you're only a consumer of binary distros, I don't really get why you'd care.

Both.

If your code only works in gcc, it has a stange GNUism that is probably a bug.

It's not often you find code that only works in clang, but that's probably a bug when it happens.

>Be the musl team
>Write a std lin with a much stronger goal of being specification accurate than glibc
>Write nice, tested and correct code
>Get people complaining nothing works, because most apps rely on accidental behaviour in glibc

The freetard libc is also needed for most proprietary software, since most of it relies on glibc.

>implying you can steal what is freely given to do as whomever takes it pleases

If you want to get pedantic, I compile vanilla with selected patches and modified config.

It's the idea.
I'm using MUSL because I like it.
It's not like I really see any difference.
It's the principle.

clang, only a fool would keep using gcc today. even linux is being ported to clang.

Attached: 1359236051-gcc-llvm.jpg (1070x400, 106K)

>make nice popular GPL software
>get lucrative consultant jobs at companies using your software
>freetards sue companies on your behalf without your consent for violating the GPL
>you don't see a single of cent from those lawsuits
>every company is too scared now to use your software

That's what happened to Rob Landley

> I'm using MUSL because I like it.
MUSL you're at least using more directly.

Binaries from GCC vs CLANG are more like viewing images encoded with one JPEG compressor vs another one. They're both mature and across a whole distribution's worth of binaries you get a mixed result on which compiled this or that marginally better.

I think GCC is a little bit better at optimizing than Clang is.
Also, clang used to have the advantage of fast compile times, but I've noticed that that's no longer the case. It compiles programs just as slowly as GCC does nowadays. Wonder why.
That said, GCC still misses some obvious optimizations that Clang does, such as not turning long if-else chains into a switch, no matter how long it gets.

I program in C so I use both directly.

tcc of course

Compcert

lol, I'm pretty sure the attempt to port linux to clang failed.

afaik kernel is now builable* with clang, but the whole process still needs linker from binutils

>No TRIM
wrong

I use clang because a lot of my tooling uses it. Flycheck and company for example both have great clang backends. Sure beats irony-mode.

How so?

>takes a year to compile the same code
>takes 3x the ram
>not faster

gcc

linux 4.15 is compilable with clang

How do I compile it with one?
I'm running 4.16.5 right now.

Also, what is the analogue of the GCC native optimization?

>clang have proprietary extension(s)
what do you mean? isn't it open source?

Most of the syntax is the same. I actually can't think of gcc flags that don't work.
Are you sure? Last I checked the Clang/Linux project was dead.
Actually, you're right.
ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2386423
>writing your kernel in non-standard C
wew

if you're using jvm why not scalac?

Don't listen to that shill. There is nothing proprietary about clang. It's just not GPL'd and it's modular which short circuited RMS' brain. He actually regrets not accepting the LLVM project's offer of using gcc as the fronted.
See

Gcc

Just compiled 4.16.5 with clang: make -j4 CC=clang.

It works! Hype is real!

I was testing this right now as well, and just did
emerge -av clang
cd /usr/src/linux && time make -j16 CC=clang
it took considerably longer to compile than usual and threw out few warnings, but finished. I just need to finish few things and reboot to see if it actually works

Yep, it was longer for me too, but everything seems to work.

This. gcc is one big tangled mess, and it applies optimizations as it builds the AST, rather building the AST and THEN running an optimization visitor. clang builds the AST unaltered as one phase, which can then be fed into a static analysis phase, or a code generation phase, or whatever else you might want to do with the AST. I also think LLVM's architecture of separating language-specific parsing from platform-specific code generation is a fundamentally good idea.

[ 0.000000] Linux version 4.14.37 (root@box) (clang version 5.0.1 (tags/RELEASE_501/final))
So far, so good. Can watch anime and shitposting on Jow Forums works.

>clang version 5.0.1
Stable branch?
[ 0.000000] Linux version 4.16.5-chrysalis (root@chrysalis) (clang version 6.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_600/final)) #1
SMP PREEMPT Sun Apr 29 14:18:47 CEST 2018

gcc, only gcc, and make sure you tweet to an assburger that hates gcc when you do.

GCC

I use clang for tooling.

it has useful outputs for autocomplete and warning/errors.

>companies violate the GPL
>get sued by author
???
What's wrong with this? He used the GPL because he wanted to guarantee the end user's freedom. It's useless if he doesn't enforce it