

Clang vs. GCC memory use graphs - pieter
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2009-May/005181.html

======
twohey
It's nice to see competition in the compiler space. We all benefit from
improved tools, and the llvm / clang folks are doing a great job making better
tools. </fan>

Hopefully they'll have some more announcements at WWDC

------
dimitar
Generally when you optimize for less cycles, you use more memory, and vice
versa, and as far I know gcc doesn't spare memory in the name of performance.

Different focus, perhaps? Anyway, what I wrote was purely anecdotal, so if
anyone posts data it will be much better.

~~~
vomjom
Actually, it's often the opposite.

In particular, clang tries to use the least amount of memory possible for
better caching effects, which is why it compiles much faster.

For the compiled program, it's also comparable in speed (and sometimes faster)
in most benchmarks. That's pretty impressive given that GCC has been around
much longer and has more developers.

