Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 19:06:04 +1000 From: Da Rock <freebsd-questions@herveybayaustralia.com.au> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Clang - what is the story? Message-ID: <4F1BD17C.3030209@herveybayaustralia.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20120122074558.GA22918@hemlock.hydra> References: <4F1AAB66.5070100@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20120121133506.7bcfaec9@gumby.homeunix.com> <20120121154313.53d3fec6@gumby.homeunix.com> <20120122070205.GA13081@hemlock.hydra> <4F1BB640.2050707@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20120122074558.GA22918@hemlock.hydra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/22/12 17:45, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 05:09:52PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: >> On 01/22/12 17:02, Chad Perrin wrote: >>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 03:43:13PM +0000, RW wrote: >>>> I was just wondering what would have happened if Apple hadn't backed >>>> clang/LLVM as BSD licensed projects. Was there a plan B (other than >>>> gcc 4.2.1) or did Apple save the *BSD world? >>> The backup plan was probably PCC. >> Whats actually surprising is that it wasn't used as plan A (I just >> looked it up); It then would have come full circle ;) > A couple years ago, it looked like a race between PCC and TenDRA, but > Clang seemed to just come out of nowhere and steal all the attention. > All three of them had a lot to recommend them, but then the TenDRA > modernization project evaporated and everybody jumped on the Clang wagon. > At least, that's how it looked to me. Wow! I'm going to have to do some more research on compilers- I've never heard of these until now... I sound pretty stupid don't I? :P
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F1BD17C.3030209>