Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th May 2012 13:55 UTC
FreeBSD "The intent is to switch on this option by default rather sooner than later, so we can start preparing for shipping 10.0-RELEASE with Clang as the default system compiler, and deprecating gcc." Good to see Clang/LLVM continue to gain as much steam as it does. This will only make GCC better.
Thread beginning with comment 518042
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
GNOME and Linux
by robmv on Mon 14th May 2012 14:54 UTC
robmv
Member since:
2006-08-12

God for them, another good compiler is good for everyone. I only wish that when GNOME (and other DEs) start talking about better integration with Linux kernels and systemd and other GPLs technologies, BSD people do not start to cry because those teams want it.

They want a compiler compatible with their license that will allow it to be better integrated with their code (IDEs, static analysis, etc). I want better integration of my desktop with the underlying OS

Reply Score: 2

RE: GNOME and Linux
by cfgr on Mon 14th May 2012 15:23 in reply to "GNOME and Linux"
cfgr Member since:
2009-07-18

Requiring dependencies on optional components (what does the boot process have to do with a desktop?) is typically a sign of a bad software architecture.

A better design is modular so that you can add extra functionality on Linux but still keep it operational on other systems as well (either without that specific functionality or with a similar one specific to that system). Having a hard requirement is just lazy and such an attitude typically leads to code that is less stable, harder to maintain and more difficult to adapt if systemd is replaced by the next best thing.

From my own experience, keeping cross platform/compiler compatibility is a good thing even if you care about one platform only. Not just from a programming point of view, it also keeps options open for the future.

Edited 2012-05-14 15:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: GNOME and Linux
by dsmogor on Mon 14th May 2012 15:32 in reply to "RE: GNOME and Linux"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

The point is whether you have resources for that.
You can propel indefinitely good architectures only if you have infinite experienced developer input.
I don't have any study at hand but the gut feeling is that Linux desktop developer supply have gotten quite a blow recently that one could attribute OSX and IOS popularity.
With limited resources at hand and tougher than ever competition (from both MS and Apple) that threaten putting all those efforts on brink of irrelevance, tough decisions have to be made.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: GNOME and Linux
by Valhalla on Mon 14th May 2012 16:21 in reply to "GNOME and Linux"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

Yes, due to not being able to ship GPLv3 licenced code (due to the wishes of their corporate sponsors iirc) they've been stuck with GCC 4.2 (just like OSX) which is really old. That, together with Clang/LLVM sharing their licence made it an obvious move.

Their transition to Clang/LLVM has been ongoing since 2009 and now it's going to happen in the 10.0 release which shows that Clang/LLVM now has matured sufficiently to be shipped as the default compiler.

I think it's great that we have both these compiler toolchains (I use both) and their friendly competition and respective strengths means we have more possibilities and better tools available in the open source ecosystem.

Reply Parent Score: 3