[erlang-questions] R16B03-1 installation glitch

[Anthony Ramine]

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.

Regards,

-- 
Anthony Ramine

Le 17 févr. 2014 à 14:03, Lukas Larsson <lukas@REDACTED> 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.
>