MacPorts clang performance (and arm_runtime)
Craig Treleaven
ctreleaven at macports.org
Sat Dec 20 11:01:41 PST 2014
At 7:17 PM +0100 12/20/14, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>Some of you may remember that I've wondered
>aloud in the past why MacPorts clang (3.4) was
>considerably slower than all other compilers,
>while the Apple-provided almost-the-same clang
>3.4 was considerably faster, in line with claims
>about clang performance. Same for clang-3.4 on
>Linux (i.e. not Apple provided): it is faster
>than gcc.
>
>Just now I noticed a possible explanation:
>
>> port variants llvm-3.6
>>
>> llvm-3.6 has the variants:
>> [+]assertions: Enable assertions for error detection (has performance
>> impacts, especially on JIT)
>
>So the default variant, and the only one
>available as a binary package, is built to be
>slow and crash upon certain errors.
Re the speed impact, it would be easy enough to
install with -assertions and do A-B tests to
quantitfy the difference.
Related, but an aside...the ability to have
multiple versions installed and switch among them
with port activate/deactivate is brilliant. :)
Craig
More information about the macports-users
mailing list