On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 6:35 AM, Ryan wrote:
>> >> I don't know; it just seems weird, since LLVM and libg
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski
> wrote:
> > 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% c
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> 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).
>>
>
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
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
Hi Dave.
There is no documentation, but we can help you on IRC. Two things that
pop into my mind:
* Can libgcc patch existing assembler? (it's necessary)
* Can libgcc tell us where on stack are GC roots? (also necessary)
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 4:13 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> I'm the maintaine
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-process. See:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/JIT
I've been experimenting with embedding it within PyPy - my thought was
that gcc has great breadth o
10 matches
Mail list logo
