[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM

[David Mandelin]

Richard Pennington wrote:
> Chris Lattner wrote:
>   
>> This is a very cool hack, but I'm curious: what is your goal with this  
>> work?  Are you just trying to see if it can be done, or does elsa  
>> provide an advantage over using the g++ parser with llvm?
>>
>> -Chris
>> _______________________________________________
>>     
> [snipped]
> I became interested in Elsa (via google) because I liked its extensible 
> nature. I can drop in new syntax rules easily. It was also fairly easy 
> to understand.
>
> [...]
> It was easy to lower the Elsa AST to LLVM by using Elsa's extension 
> capability.
>
> I'm now at the point where I can see that compiling C with Elsa is a 
> done deal. I have about 90% (or more) of basic C covered.
>   
Looks like I'm late to this discussion, but I wanted to chime in and say 
this is really cool stuff.
> I decided that I wanted a cleaner way to move forward so I started 
> writing the ellsif driver to automate the steps and make Elsa->LLVM look 
> like a real tool.
>
> Does Elsa provide an advantage over g++? For me, understanding it is a 
> big plus. ;-) In addition, Elsa has a Berkeley-like license which I prefer.
>
> I'll let you know if Elsa is a good choice after I get a little further 
> along adding the C++ support.
>   
 From what I've learned so far, Elsa and LLVM are both much closer to a 
textbook design than gcc or anything like it, so I'd expect them to be 
much easier to work with and maintain. Hopefully easier to attract 
developers to as well. (I like Dan's comment about the end of gcc, too.)

Dave
MoCo Platform N00b