Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #91142

Re: GCC vs Clang

From raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos)
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: GCC vs Clang
Date 2016-07-27 15:17 +0000
Organization Go wash your mouth.
Message-ID <5798ceed.3489562@news.xs4all.nl> (permalink)
References (5 earlier) <d8203c30-aff8-414b-aa0d-7da127b5c069@googlegroups.com> <ln37mxcohv.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <acfa3004-b897-4e0e-a0cc-c4340de5f1fd@googlegroups.com> <nn6ron$bd5$2@dont-email.me> <lnpoq0bzo3.fsf@kst-u.example.com>

Show all headers | View raw

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:

> jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:
> > Le 26/07/2016 à 01:31, supercat@casperkitty.com a écrit :
> >> Separating the library from the compiler makes it unclear what a compiler
> >> is or is not allowed to assume about the way the library is used.
> >
> > To give a popular example: The gcc compiler under the "mingw" version 
> > (windows) recognizes long double and generates code for 80 bits longs 
> > double. But mingw uses the Microsoft C library, and that printf doesn't 
> > recognize long doubles, since Microsoft doesn't support them. We have 
> > answered MANY times questions here from people that ask why their printf 
> > "wasn't working".
> >
> > Separating the library from the compiler is just NONSENSE!
> 
> Separating the library from the compiler is what made MinGW possible in
> the first place.

Well, that explains why there were no ports of GCC to Microsoft
platforms before MinGW. Good thing DJ Delorie never gave up his day job
as a shrimp fisherman, then.

Sorry, Keith, but in this case, supercat and jacob are mostly(!) right
and you are mostly(!) wrong. There _are_ reasons for separating the
compiler from the library, and a few of them are good, but the main one
does appear to be the ability to pass the buck around when the two don't
work together.
The reasons for keeping the development of the implementation in one
hand are more important to me. I prefer a complete implementation, not a
bunch of parts sourced from incestuous-but-legally-separate parties. I
don't buy my car as a DIY kit, either. I'll assemble my own furniture,
because that only has to stay up, but as soon as something has to do
work, like a car or a C implementation, I want it built by the vendor,
not by me.

Richard

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

GCC vs Clang The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> - 2016-07-22 17:29 +0000
  Re: GCC vs Clang Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2016-07-22 20:17 +0200
  Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-22 21:09 +0200
    Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-22 12:22 -0700
      Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-22 23:20 +0200
        Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-22 14:56 -0700
        Re: GCC vs Clang jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-07-22 15:27 -0700
        Re: GCC vs Clang Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-23 00:59 -0700
          Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-23 20:33 +0200
          Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-23 12:18 -0700
            Re: GCC vs Clang Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-23 12:54 -0700
              Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-23 13:48 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-23 22:54 +0200
                Killfiles: Learn how they work.  They are your friend!  (Was: GCC vs Clang) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-07-23 21:14 +0000
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-25 13:10 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-25 05:20 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-25 15:43 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-25 07:09 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-23 22:08 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-25 13:21 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-25 14:38 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Mark Storkamp <mstorkamp@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-25 09:30 -0500
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-25 15:41 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-25 16:33 +0200
        Re: GCC vs Clang Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-07-24 07:46 -0700
        Re: GCC vs Clang Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2016-07-25 11:02 -0400
        Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 02:00 -0700
          Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 02:25 -0700
  Re: GCC vs Clang Jens Stuckelberger <Jens_Stuckelberger@nowhere.net> - 2016-07-22 20:42 +0000
    Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-22 23:09 +0200
      Re: GCC vs Clang Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2016-07-25 10:50 -0400
    Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-23 19:53 +0100
      Re: GCC vs Clang raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-23 19:50 +0000
      Re: GCC vs Clang Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2016-07-25 11:07 -0400
        Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-25 17:16 +0100
          Re: GCC vs Clang raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-27 07:27 +0000
            Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-27 08:29 +0100
          Re: GCC vs Clang Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2016-07-27 12:29 -0400
    Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 02:44 -0700
  Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-22 22:18 +0100
    Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-22 14:43 -0700
      Re: GCC vs Clang Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-07-23 00:02 +0200
        Re: GCC vs Clang already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2016-08-09 17:20 -0700
          Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-10 10:34 +0200
            Re: GCC vs Clang Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-10 02:18 -0700
          Re: GCC vs Clang cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2016-08-10 15:31 +0000
    Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-25 13:31 +0200
      Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-25 15:14 +0100
        Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-25 16:57 +0200
          Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-25 17:24 +0100
          Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-07-25 15:29 -0700
            Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-25 16:00 -0700
              Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-07-25 16:31 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-25 17:06 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-07-26 07:52 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-26 08:20 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-26 16:23 +1200
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-26 07:17 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-26 00:56 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-27 15:17 +0000
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-27 09:36 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-27 10:04 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-27 20:42 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-27 20:29 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-07-27 12:08 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-31 14:43 +0000
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-28 07:32 +1200
                Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-07-27 13:23 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-28 17:13 +1200
              Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-26 07:10 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-26 17:19 +1200
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-26 08:28 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-26 00:53 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-26 02:04 -0700
        Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-25 08:41 -0700
          Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-25 17:37 +0100
            Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-25 12:07 -0700
            Re: GCC vs Clang? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-25 22:57 +0200
              Re: GCC vs Clang? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-26 14:08 +0200
              Re: GCC vs Clang? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-27 15:18 +0000
                Re: GCC vs Clang? jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-27 22:01 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-28 09:56 +0000
            Re: GCC vs Clang Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2016-07-27 12:38 -0400
            Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-28 07:38 +1200
              Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-27 20:54 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-28 08:16 +1200
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-27 23:55 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-28 07:20 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-28 19:35 +1200
                Re: GCC vs Clang raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-31 14:47 +0000
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-28 19:35 +1200
                Re: GCC vs Clang already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2016-08-09 17:00 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang eva galois <eva.galois@yandex.ru> - 2016-08-09 21:15 -0400
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-10 10:42 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-08-10 12:52 +0000
                Re: GCC vs Clang already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2016-08-10 06:59 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-10 16:52 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-10 11:22 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-08-10 11:31 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-10 14:01 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2016-08-10 07:12 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-10 17:09 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-10 09:40 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2016-08-10 09:55 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-10 22:51 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-10 09:36 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-10 17:52 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-10 11:49 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-10 20:28 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-10 13:06 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org> - 2016-08-10 18:14 -0400
                Re: GCC vs Clang Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2016-08-10 21:53 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-11 10:35 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-11 11:00 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-11 09:36 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-11 18:54 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-11 12:11 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-11 20:42 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-11 19:53 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-11 12:41 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-11 20:21 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-11 13:11 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-11 21:46 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 20:49 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-11 13:57 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-11 23:10 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-08-14 09:07 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-14 10:50 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-14 13:47 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-08-14 16:29 -0400
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-14 23:00 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 14:04 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 14:11 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-14 15:29 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-08-14 18:13 -0400
                Re: GCC vs Clang Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-08-15 00:14 -0700
                Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" (Was: GCC vs Clang) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-08-15 08:04 +0000
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" (Was: GCC vs Clang) fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 01:15 -0700
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" (Was: GCC vs Clang) jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-17 16:50 +0200
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-08-15 07:27 -0600
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-08-15 15:00 +0100
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-08-15 10:29 -0400
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" Mark Storkamp <mstorkamp@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-15 10:22 -0500
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-15 17:46 +0200
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-08-15 17:41 +0100
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-08-15 09:47 -0700
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-08-15 11:11 -0600
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-08-15 13:28 -0400
                Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor" fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 10:05 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang (was Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor") Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-15 11:52 -0700
                Re: Trolling (was Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor") gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2016-08-15 18:00 +0000
                Re: Trolling (was Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor") fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 11:34 -0700
                Re: Trolling (was Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor") fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 11:48 -0700
                Re: Trolling (was Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor") fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 11:56 -0700
                Re: Trolling (was Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor") fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 12:10 -0700
                Re: Trolling (was Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor") fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 12:18 -0700
                Re: Trolling (was Re: Keith's subtle use of the word "vendor") mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 08:44 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-15 09:38 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-08-17 08:24 +0000
                Re: GCC vs Clang Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org> - 2016-08-17 17:44 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-15 17:25 +1200
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 23:09 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 23:16 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 23:28 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-14 10:50 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 02:30 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-08-14 14:16 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 07:28 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2016-08-14 18:05 +0000
                Re: GCC vs Clang Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-08-14 20:18 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 11:54 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 12:05 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-14 21:16 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 12:37 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-08-14 20:59 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 13:48 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 13:58 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 02:53 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-08-14 11:34 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-08-14 14:07 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-08-14 12:36 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-14 14:03 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-08-15 09:48 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-15 11:46 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 10:45 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2016-08-11 14:11 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2016-08-11 14:06 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-08-11 15:16 -0400
                Re: GCC vs Clang Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2016-08-11 14:02 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-11 22:20 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 16:58 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-12 17:05 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-11 23:24 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-11 22:58 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-11 16:08 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-12 00:21 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-11 17:29 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-12 12:23 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-08-12 11:43 +0100
                Re: GCC vs Clang jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-08-13 08:37 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2016-08-11 13:58 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2016-08-11 16:28 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2016-08-12 01:12 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-12 20:15 +1200
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-12 12:29 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-08-12 12:45 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-08-12 04:30 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-08-12 08:09 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-12 14:49 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2016-08-12 05:00 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-12 15:03 +0200
                Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-08-12 08:22 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-12 09:14 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-08-12 10:23 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-12 11:29 -0700
                Re: GCC vs Clang already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2016-08-12 05:19 -0700
    Re: GCC vs Clang Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2016-07-25 10:53 -0400
  Re: GCC vs Clang raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-23 09:55 +0000
  Re: GCC vs Clang Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-23 12:35 -0700

csiph-web