On 26 July 2015 at 18:33, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:

> if "fast compilation" is a feature over plan 9, I'd like to see some
> numbers.


That wasn't the point, I think. The mention of speed was rather that on
fast enough hardware the speed with gcc isn't that bad,
so you can use that. (That misses another point, but that's not relevant
here.)

The aim in using gcc wasn't the speed, but to produce an environment that
was compatible with all the existing software
(not POSIX -- although it says that -- being "POSIX" is both too little and
too much).