There is a rumor that Apple will announce at the WWDC2020, the 22 june,
that the Macs of generation 2021 and beyond will use ARM processors in
place of the Intel processors.
Is Golang ready to follow this move ? Will I be able to compile and run my
go programs on ARM Macs ?
--
You received
I'd say Go is as ready as you can be for that move. darwin/arm64 is
currently a fully supported architecture, and I doubt you need lots of work
in order to make the port to an eventual new Mac generation. By far the
most complex part of that port is support of arm64, but that work has
already been
The App Store does not store LLVM IR code for Mac software - at least not by
default. It stores compiled binaries and optional debug symbols.
> On Jun 10, 2020, at 4:51 AM, Jesper Louis Andersen
> wrote:
>
>
> I'd say Go is as ready as you can be for that move. darwin/arm64 is currently
>
Ah, I was wrong. It is the iOS, watchOS, tvOS stuff that does that. The
name is "Bitcode".
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:52 PM Robert Engels
wrote:
> The App Store does not store LLVM IR code for Mac software - at least not
> by default. It stores compiled binaries and optional debug symbols.
>
> O
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 2:32 AM Christophe Meessen
wrote:
>
> There is a rumor that Apple will announce at the WWDC2020, the 22 june, that
> the Macs of generation 2021 and beyond will use ARM processors in place of
> the Intel processors.
>
> Is Golang ready to follow this move ? Will I be able
On Jun 10, 2020, at 5:50 AM, Jesper Louis Andersen
wrote:
>
> 2. Dynamic binary translation from machine-code to machine-code has been used
> in the past for these architectural changes. While this carries a penalty, it
> also provides a short-term solution. The added efficiency of recompiles
On Jun 10, 2020, at 3:23 PM, David Riley wrote:
>
> Also worth noting that IBM i (f/k/a System i and AS/400) traditionally stores
> its executables as an IR form to be compiled to native code (currently PPC)
> on execution, though my recollection is that this is a one-time process, not
> a JIT
On Wednesday, June 10, 2020 at 1:24:24 PM UTC-6, David Riley wrote:
>
> This is certainly pedantry, but it's worth noting that the VAX to Alpha
> translation in VMS wasn't dynamic recompilation, but static. There are
> almost certainly similar examples; I'm not familiar enough with NT history
>
When Macs first switched to Intel the OS included a Motorola 68k emulator so
that existing Mac binaries would run.
> On Jun 10, 2020, at 6:17 PM, Scott Pakin wrote:
>
>
>> On Wednesday, June 10, 2020 at 1:24:24 PM UTC-6, David Riley wrote:
>> This is certainly pedantry, but it's worth noting
Not quite. When they switched to PowerPC, that was the case; the initial one
was a table-driven instruction translator in ROM originally written for the
M88k, which had been the original target before Motorola canned it, but it was
apparently a relatively simple thing to change the translations
Yep. My timeline/memory was wrong. It was the 68k to PowerPC. Intel required
dual binaries. Thanks for the correction.
> On Jun 10, 2020, at 8:26 PM, David Riley wrote:
>
> Not quite. When they switched to PowerPC, that was the case; the initial one
> was a table-driven instruction translato
The wiki page has some neat details on this
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_68k_emulator
> On Jun 10, 2020, at 9:49 PM, Robert Engels wrote:
>
> Yep. My timeline/memory was wrong. It was the 68k to PowerPC. Intel required
> dual binaries. Thanks for the correction.
>
>> On Jun 10, 2020,
12 matches
Mail list logo
