Re: "Future" of llvm-gcc with regards to support (Jens Alfke)
Re: "Future" of llvm-gcc with regards to support (Jens Alfke)
- Subject: Re: "Future" of llvm-gcc with regards to support (Jens Alfke)
- From: Roni Music <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 08:46:14 +0100
On Feb 28, 2012, at 6:47 AM, Andreas Grosam wrote:
Especially in C++ sources with heavy templates and inherently more
complex code due to micro sized functions,
runtime is occasionally two to three times longer than code from gcc.
My findings are completely different:
When I recompile my iPhone audio app using Xcode 4.3 / Apple LLVM 3.1,
my sound processing code is more than 10% faster (to be exact 12 %)
comparing to using Xcode 3.2.6 with GCC 4.2.
The sound processing code is template based C++.
Building the complete project is also a lot faster using Xcode 4.3 / Apple
LLVM 3.1
Rolf
I can believe it. Apple (which AFAIK is the main contributor to Clang)
doesn’t prioritize C++ much, because they don’t use it that much
themselves. I can sympathize, because C++ must be the most unpleasant
language to parse/compile/optimize.
If it is possible, I would appreciate it, if a gcc compiler could be
integrated with Xcode. In this case clang doesn't need to be disabled
completely, it is still an invaluable tool during development within the
IDE (syntax checking, indexing, navigation, analysis, etc.).
I wonder how feasible it would be to make a 3rd party project that builds
a recent GCC and packages it in such a way that it can be called by Xcode?
—Jens
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4885 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.apple.com/archives/xcode-users/attachments/20120228/6b862d7e/attachment.p7s>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden