[LLVMdev] JVM Backend

[David Roberts]

Hi,

For anyone interested, LLJVM 0.2 has been released (which includes
this backend):

http://da.vidr.cc/projects/lljvm/

--
David Roberts
http://da.vidr.cc/



On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 20:07, David Roberts <d at vidr.cc> wrote:
>> If you apply that as a patch now, everyone else will have to maintain
>> it when they do their unrelated changes, increasing the cost of the
>> project's maintenance. I welcome your code (have been wondering about
>> it recently too), but I think that you should keep it as a separate
>> project for now. Once it's at least complete, I'm sure people will be
>> happy to apply as a patch, but for now it'll be more nuisance than
>> help.
> I hope I didn't give the impression that I was pushing to get this
> commited - I'm quite happy to keep it as a separate project.
>
> I've cleaned up the code a bit and released it as part of LLJVM[1], so
> any fixes to the problems people have highlighted in this thread will
> be pushed to the repository listed on that page as I get to them.
>
> [1] http://da.vidr.cc/projects/lljvm/
>
> --
> David Roberts
> http://da.vidr.cc/
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 19:39, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org> wrote:
>> 2009/11/30 David Roberts <d at vidr.cc>:
>>>> Nobody is asking for perfection, just completeness.
>>> I'd just like to point out that I don't have a great deal of
>>> experience in compiler development - I just thought that this would be
>>> an interesting project to try. I realise that it isn't complete in
>>> it's current state.
>>
>> Hi David and Jon,
>>
>> After reading this thread, I think there has been a slight misunderstanding.
>>
>> I agree with Jon that there are some crucial problems with your patch
>> re odd size variables and tail calls (possibly many other issues that
>> were overlooked), but I also agree with David that, as this is an
>> experiment, it's not perfect, nor complete.
>>
>> If you apply that as a patch now, everyone else will have to maintain
>> it when they do their unrelated changes, increasing the cost of the
>> project's maintenance. I welcome your code (have been wondering about
>> it recently too), but I think that you should keep it as a separate
>> project for now. Once it's at least complete, I'm sure people will be
>> happy to apply as a patch, but for now it'll be more nuisance than
>> help.
>>
>> Just to give you some figures, I've written a very simple compiler
>> using LLVM with less than 10 classes using mostly the IR codegen, some
>> function passes and the JIT. It was common for me to have to update my
>> own code twice in the same day for changes in the internal libraries.
>> I was happy to do so, but I believe that if I ever merged my code to
>> mainstream, every single one of them would have to change my code as
>> well before committing.
>>
>> Once it's complete, check in. Once it's perfect, get a Nobel prize. ;)
>>
>> My tuppence...
>>
>> cheers,
>> --renato
>>
>> Reclaim your digital rights, eliminate DRM, learn more at
>> http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm
>>
>