Le 03/03/2016 à 09:46, Andreas Tolfsen a écrit : > On 3 March 2016 at 00:13, Martin Thomson <m...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Mike Hommey <m...@glandium.org> wrote: >>> More importantly, changing the official toolchain has implications on >>> performance. >> Without any real evidence for this, I'm told that GCC still produces >> better (i.e., faster) output. But we could switch try builds to clang >> if the time savings are that good. > That was the case last time I heard of someone looking into it, but > this was a few years ago and quite possibly warrants a new > investigation. Well, with Google switching to clang for Chrome [1], Sony using clang for the PS4 compilation [2] and FreeBSD switching to clang [3], I would not be too worried about that ;)
> The time savings of compiling on clang vs. gcc are significant. On my > machine, with a populated ccache, it shaves off four-five minutes for > a clobber build, totalling roughly nine minutes in total, compared to > 14 minutes with gcc. > > I’ve been compiling with clang for two years, and one caveat if you’re > using Debian stable (and possibly still Ubuntu) is that you will need > clang-3.4 instead of clang-3.5 because of > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1078370. This has > apparently been fixed, but has not made it downstream. http://llvm.org/apt/ provides automatic backports of the various branches of the llvm-toolchain. (disclaimer: I am the one behind this) Cheers, Sylvestre [1] http://blog.llvm.org/2015/01/using-clang-for-chrome-production.html [2] http://llvm.org/devmtg/2013-11/slides/Robinson-PS4Toolchain.pdf [3] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQ1ODc _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
