[M3devel] cm3 llvm backend?

[Rodney M. Bates]

On 06/27/2016 03:29 PM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2016, Rodney M. Bates wrote:
>
>> And no, the names and operator spellings are not close to adequate
>> to clue you in.  They have gone to every length possible to use
>> every clever new C++ "feature" that comes out in the latest
>> C++-<n> standard, which always just increases the complexity
>> of the search to a declaration.  So I don't fancy doing any of
>> this.  (BTW, <n>=17 in recent discussions.)
>
> A teacher of mine called this behavior "version junkie".
>

Yes, yes.

>
>> Actually, keeping their bitcode stable across llvm releases is
>> one place they do talk about compatibility.  But m3llvm uses calls
>> to llvm APIs to construct llvm IR as in-memory data, then another
>> call to get llvm to convert it to bitcode.  So bitcode's stability
>> is irrelevant to us.  I once thought about producing llvm bitcode
>> directly, but that seems like a pretty big job.  It would, however,
>> obviate creating most of those wretched bindings.
>
> An alternative would be to create .ll text files. But its format changes, too.

Yes.  But, according to the list talk, they don't have the intention to
make it as stable as the bitcode format.


> _______________________________________________
> M3devel mailing list
> M3devel at elegosoft.com
> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel
>

-- 
Rodney Bates
rodney.m.bates at acm.org