Do I understand it correctly that there are no useful thoughts or ideas with-out- flaming and flooding about LLVM?
Thanks, Kirill > > 2009/4/1 Kirill Kononenko <kirill.konone...@gmail.com>: >> Please, let collect together all useful ideas and concrete thoughts? I >> am sure many people already have thought about which JITing support >> GCC users need. I also do have my thoughts about this research topic >> but I would like also to have useful feedback from people who also >> understand this research topic like me and gcc internals. Please also >> stop flaming about LLVM. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> Kirill >> >> >> 2009/4/1 Kirill Kononenko <kirill.konone...@gmail.com>: >>> 2009/4/1 Daniel Berlin <dber...@dberlin.org>: >>>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Kirill Kononenko >>>> <kirill.konone...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Hello Dear GCC Developers, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of >>>>> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the >>>>> same way as libffi is integrated within gcc source tree. It seems to >>>>> me that LLVM solves many goals that are already complete and solved in >>>>> GCC. So I think libJIT potentially is more useful for GCC and software >>>>> developers. >>>>> >>>> Highly disagree. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> What is your opinion about this idea? How this should be done and what >>>>> improvements could be made to both libJIT and GCC for this kind of >>>>> integration? >>>> >>>> I don't think we should integrate libJIT into GCC. It doesn't solve >>>> any of the *interesting* JIT problems we would have, it only solves >>> >>> What are exactly the *interesting* JIT problems you have? And who are >>> exactly "we" again in this case? Is it Google? Or you personally speak >>> for all GCC user community? >>> >>>> the ones we know how to solve in a fairly short time (given enough >>>> developers). >>> >>> Do you actually have these extra 'enough developers'? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Kirill >>> >> >
