Re: clang vs gcc 4.7

[Riccardo Mottola]

Hi,

On 03/03/13 13:17, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:
> My take on the relative merits is:
>
> The advantages of gcc are that it's the de-facto standard (you generally don't 
> have to install it, let alone build it yourself), is much more portable/ported 
> (reliable on many more platforms), and has most of the good things that Apple 
> has added to objc, and less of the the bloat such as 'blocks'.
+1 ! If yo udon't use something, why do you need support for it?
> but clang has two really nice things going for it:
> 1. the static analyser can spot quite a few coding errors, and that's great
> 2. clang has ARC support, which is really cool
>
> Since I generally want high portability, I stick with code that builds in gcc, 
> but I do use clang for the static analyser.
Yes, the static analyser is great! It has helped to find some weird 
errors in GAP applications ad even GWorkspace! However, it sometimes 
gives false positive which are quite bad, so it is a great tool, but not 
something to rely blindly on.
I also had code working on Clang and not GCC: the code was wrong, but 
GCC optimized moer I guess so the memory error was caught (the latest 
Example about this was in Gorm)
The best in my opinion to write code that works on both compiler, check 
warnings on both, test on both and the result is stronger code.
I hope both will remain alive, since I like choice and diversity of tools.

Riccardo