On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 6:35 AM, Ryan wrote:
> I don't know; it just seems weird, since LLVM and libgccjit seem to hold
> similar concepts (though there's a 99% chance I'm wrong; I just glanced over
> the libgccjit description).
>
> What I *really* wish PyPy could have would be a C-- backend. *Tha
I don't know; it just seems weird, since LLVM and libgccjit seem to hold
similar concepts (though there's a 99% chance I'm wrong; I just glanced over
the libgccjit description).
What I *really* wish PyPy could have would be a C-- backend. *That* would be
insanely awesome and would probably blow
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> As awesome as this would be, I'd be surprised if this worked since LLVM
> didn't.
and you're basing it on what precisely?
LLVM didn't work for a variety of reasons, a myriad bugs being one of them
__
As awesome as this would be, I'd be surprised if this worked since LLVM
didn't.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 8:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> I'm the maintainer of a new feature for the (not-yet-released) GCC 5:
> libgccjit: a way to build gcc as a shared library, suitable for
> generating code in-pr
Hey all,
Earlier today I created the 2.7.9 branch, with the copy of the 2.7.9 stdlib.
http://buildbot.pypy.org/summary?branch=stdlib-2.7.9 is the branch summary.
It's no surprise, the biggest work to be done is for the ssl module, 2.7.9
contains a complete backport of 3.4's ssl module.
We have
Hi,
On 13 December 2014 at 13:59, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> * Can libgcc tell us where on stack are GC roots? (also necessary)
This constraint can be relaxed nowadays: it's enough e.g. if we tell
gcc to reserve register %rbp to contain the jitframe object. That's
the only GC root that's reall
