[erlang-questions] R16B03-1 installation glitch

Anthony Ramine <>
Tue Feb 18 10:35:20 CET 2014

Thus should be checked, preferably the test should be automated.

I don’t see any obvious reason why Clang should be slower now it supports &&-label addresses.


Anthony Ramine

Le 17 févr. 2014 à 14:03, Lukas Larsson <> a écrit :

> Last time I heard clang produced code for beam_emu.c that was about 10-20% slower than gcc. Also compiling complicated files (I'm looking at you again beam_emu.c) is much slower in clang.

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list