From 51dd22e205166f157b4f661ef27e26181151b027 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: texhno Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 11:39:38 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Update Home --- Home.md | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/Home.md b/Home.md index c0936d2..16f2b7d 100644 --- a/Home.md +++ b/Home.md @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ To safeguard against dependency hell, all the essential software needed to devel * Clang reportedly has better error messages * Clang/LLVM `lld` links on average twice as fast as GCC `ld` (Up to 10 times faster, reportedly) * GCC - GPL, Clang - Apache licenses +* The standard may move towards Clang/LLVM? Decision: They have many differences, above are the potentially most relevant. The GPL license seems preferable in this case, which is a point in favor of GCC. A major performance consideration comes when there are a lot of lib files as well as -debug. This difference will come down to the linker, and seeing as `lld` can be a drop-in replacement for `ld`, and added independently of Clang, it is not a major point in favor of Clang. We can simply install `lld` from the LLVM backend (Clang is just the frontend), and pass the `-fuse-ld=lld` flag to GCC to make it use `lld` instead of `ld`. For these reasons, I propose to start with GCC.