Rob Thorpe (rthorpe@realworldtech.com) on 6/24/10 wrote:
---------------------------
>ajensen (@.) on 6/24/10 wrote:
>---------------------------
>..
>>community would be wise to make a shift to LLVM/CLANG.
>
>As I understand it the LLVM system isn't really conceptually simpler than the old GCC backends.
>
>In terms of the size of the code-base for the whole compiter suite LLVM isn't much smaller than GCC.
>
>http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/index.html
>
>I'm not persuaded that it will really help.
>
>That's not to say that the situation can't be improved. I'm just not convinced that LLVM will improve it much.

From where I stand the major difference are the supporting developers..

LLVM is one hell of a lot more receptive to bug reports, fixes, enhancements, etc.

I have seen a critical SH target fix for GCC that was ignored for 2 years, then refused on the basis that they simply didnt care. LLVM are not like that..

GCC has gone through a number of painful times (the old days of them refusing to csare about x86 for example, in the good old risc is king days..), which they were dragged kicking and screaming out of, but it seems to keep sliding back.