On Apr 1, 2009, at 5:09 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
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.
but you don't say what libjit would be more useful than, or how this
overlap
between "solved goals" between gcc and llvm implies that. Do you
simply mean
that, because llvm and gcc both cover similar areas, and because
libjit is
useful for llvm, it must also be useful for gcc? Could you list
some of these
goals and explain how they relate to JIT?
Hi Dave,
I don't mean to invade into a pretty amusing thread, but I wanted to
clarify one important thing: litjit and LLVM have nothing to do with
each other.
libjit and LLVM have very different design points. libjit is a bit
more than a glorified macro assembler with some late "optimizations",
whereas LLVM is a real compiler that happens to have the ability to
emit machine code to memory.
To be perfectly clear, LLVM does not use libjit.
-Chris
