Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th

On 2012-09-11 16:27, Tijl Coosemans wrote:> On 11-09-2012 16:10, Dimitry Andric wrote:
....
>> Yes, maths support, specifically precision, is admittedly still one of
>> clang's (really llvm's) weaker points.  It is currently not really a
>> high priority item for upstream.
>>
>> This is obviously something that a certain part of our userbase will
>> care a lot about, while most of the time they won't care so much about
>> licensing or politics.  So those people are probably better off using
>> gcc for the time being.
>
> Does it affect the accuracy of libm functions?

It seems to, at least in specific cases; Steve posted about this in an
earlier thread on -current:

   http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120905221310.GA97847
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"