What is a good alternative to gcc?

what is a good alternative to gcc?

Attached: 220px-Tux.png (220x261, 39K)

Other urls found in this thread:

harmful.cat-v.org/software/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

There isnt one

Attached: 1538833592959.png (293x81, 29K)

icc

tcc

clang
It's the default compiler on FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and many other OSes, too, so it's well-supported. It's not GOOD, but it's better than GCC, at least.

openwacom

What's wrong with gcc? How are these alternatives better?

>better than GCC
AHAHAHAHAHAGAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

musl-gcc

slow as shit, eat huge ram and mainstream

someday i want a full ICC gentoo system

>good alternative
Anal rape.
>better alternative
clang.
>best alternative
VS.

>msvc
>good
kek

Another useless poorfag offers his opinion.
Kek indeed. Kek indeed.

Attached: 1274716772505.gif .gif (208x156, 1.23M)

clang is comfy

GCC is broken by design by that fat retard GNUfag did not want companies to use GCC as a compiler back end, so it's explicity designed to be monolithic.

Attached: c87.jpg (600x902, 58K)

harmful.cat-v.org/software/

clang

>falling for the llvm meme
oh no no no no n
tcc unironically

based

MSBuild

cc

In my tests, I find GCC produces faster code than either clang or the MS compiler.

I will admit that test was a couple years ago now.

>mainstream
i see your in too sekrit klub

1 poo has been deposited into your loo

compilers are bloat
just rewrite the code into assembly by hand

>not writing it in binary
lmao pleb

>not writing octal opcodes on your self-made arhitecture on a FPGA
pleb

msvc is so good on win, it's way easier to set up and get using than gcc/msys2 whatever

It still holds true today in my experience.
Clang, however, does use less memory, is faster than gcc and produces more useful diagnostics. It's clearly superior to use it as the back end of a syntax checking tool.
But when generating binaries to actually run and ship, gcc is still better.