/prog/ - GCC sucks

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 17:52

clang is the future and haters gonna hate.
Stalltards aren't welcome.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 17:57

too bad clang shits out python-quality code

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:01

>C
undefined shit

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:02

>>3
enjoy your lisp

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:10

>>4
I do.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:12

If you're writing an interpreter for a language, would you rather:
A. Roll your own shitty conservative GC on top of malloc like Rob Pike and le Go Team.
B. Use reference counting and prohibit circular references in your language.
C. Use a built-in type-safe GC written by competent programmers who know how GC works.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:13

D. Use le Ruby

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:34

>>6
You Javelly?

That's a joke we have here at Oracle, it's Enterprise quality though, so you wouldn't understand it.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:42

``Friends don't let friends use gcc.''
--Linus Torvalds, creator of the Linux operating system

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:45

>>8
You JavellyScript?

That's a job we have here at Hacker News, it's Hipster Startup quality though, so you probably never heard of it.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:52

Clang isn't quite ready for my architecture. Maybe it'll be ready next year. GCC works today.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 19:17

>>10
You Jellisp?

That's a meme we have here at le /prog/, it's abstract bullshite though, so you probably never scraped it.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 21:17

>>5
i ddddd dod do

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 6:17

...

THE MICE GO CLANG!

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 6:41

>>8,10,12
back to /b/, please.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 8:48

GNU is poo

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 14:38

$ g++ perfectly_valid_code.cpp
here's your executable kind sir

$ clang++ perfectly_valid_code.cpp
haha, no

-.-

GCC is better.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 15:45

>>17
What the fuck are you talking about? Are you trying to compile GNU C with clang?

Also
-.-
Reddit is better for you.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 15:58

>>18
No, standard C++11.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 16:17

>>19
You are unsightly and you smell like cunt custard.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 16:59

It is 2012 and you're still using GCC? I seriously hope you guys don't do things like this.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 0:18

>>21
What's the alternative? Clang? Heh.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 1:13

niggers

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 1:39

>>22
tcc, icc, 8c

even microsoft is better than that piece of shit gcc

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:44

>>24
Does tcc support c99? I don't think so!

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:48

>>25
tcc is a C compiler, not a compiler for pseudo-sepples

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:52

>>26
C99 adds features that should have been in C all along. Nothing about C99 is "pseudo-sepples."

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:17

TCC blows gcc out of the water in terms of compiling speed and execution speed. The entire compiler also fits onto a floppy disk.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:21

GCC? We have LLVM now, please

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:25

>>28,29
Good. Now make it compile my code for ARM5, MIPS and Sparc.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:25

>>30
laughinggirls.jpg

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:33

>>31
cea49048.pdf

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:41

I only recommend clang because I like to say ``clang''.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 8:47

Clang sucks because it's created by mac fags. Now piss off!

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 10:34

>>34
What the hell hell is a mac cigarette?

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 23:22

>>22,24
Is tcc still maintained? It was a great DOS compiler but I've not seen it used much in other places.

bcc is also pretty cool. Where we're going, we don't need ANSI declarations.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:06

GCC sucks indeed, but it's our sucker.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:06

Sure, GCC sucks, but does it Abelson suck?

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:09

>>38
Is it Touring-sucking?

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:47

any language implementor with any shred of competence is either
1. using v8 as the target platform
2. ditching their idea completely and moving to a 100% javascript environment (preferred)

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:52

Sure c is undefine shit, but is it Abelson undefined shit?

GCC sucks

1 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 17:52

2 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 17:57

3 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:01

4 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:02

5 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:10

6 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:12

7 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:13

8 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:34

9 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:42

10 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:45

11 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:52

12 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 19:17

13 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 21:17

14 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 6:17

15 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 6:41

16 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 8:48

17 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 14:38

18 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 15:45

19 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 15:58

20 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 16:17

21 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 16:59

22 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 0:18

23 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 1:13

24 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 1:39

25 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:44

26 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:48

27 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:52

28 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:17

29 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:21

30 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:25

31 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:25

32 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:33

33 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:41

34 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 8:47

35 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 10:34

36 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 23:22

37 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:06

38 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:06

39 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:09

40 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:47

41 Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:52

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 17:52

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 17:57

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:01

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:02

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:10

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:12

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:13

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:34

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:42

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:45

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 18:52

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 19:17

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-17 21:17

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 6:17

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 6:41

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 8:48

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 14:38

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 15:45

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 15:58

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 16:17

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-18 16:59

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 0:18

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 1:13

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 1:39

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:44

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:48

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 3:52

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:17

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:21

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:25

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:25

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:33

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 5:41

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 8:47

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 10:34

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-19 23:22

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:06

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:06

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:09

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:47

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-20 1:52