Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 21 Jan 2012 11:39:54 -0500
From:      David Jackson <>
To:        Da Rock <>,
Subject:   Re: Clang - what is the story?
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Da Rock <> wrote:

> I've been seeing a lot of hoorays and pats on the back and a general
> feeling satisfaction in being able to use clang to compile FreeBSD and
> ports. The only reason I can see from searching is a need to get away from
> gcc (which is tried and tested since the beginning of time) which is now
> apparently GPLv3.
> Can someone offer some clarity as to the importance of this? I'm guessing
> the that stepping away from GPL is generally a good thing, especially if
> there is something similar with similar license structure to BSD; I just
> can't understand the rush of it.
> Even under GPL anything built using gcc can be licensed as you like, so I
> doubt it could be that.
> I'm not skeptical, just curious- trying to get my head around some of the
> dev side of things :)
> ______________________________**_________________
> mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-**
> <>"

The reasons for Clang are not just for the GPLv3 issue, but Clang is
architecturally superior in many ways over GCC, Clang was designed from the
ground up to learn from GCCs mistakes and to be a better C compiler. One of
the Clang's features is better debugging and a more modular architecture
that is easier to develop and extend. GCC has often been criticised for its
monolithic and inflexible structure that has often hindered implementing
new features and functionality. One of the advantages of Clang is that it
can be more easily plugged into IDEs for integrated debugging.

You can read all about the many advantages and innovations of clang and how
it exceeds GCC here:

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>