[LLVMdev] LLVM IR is a compiler IR

Dan Gohman gohman at apple.com
Wed Oct 5 08:18:48 PDT 2011

On Oct 5, 2011, at 1:17 AM, Renato Golin wrote:

> On 5 October 2011 01:19, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure what you're getting at here.  My email was not intended to say that I'm not interested in LLVM improving - quite the contrary.  My email was to rebut Dan's implicit claim that PNaCL and using LLVM as a portable IR is never going to work.  I'm arguing in the "opencl" and "pnacl" folks favor :)
> Hi Chris,
> Ok, I think I (now) get your drift. Let's restart the conversation, then. ;)
> If I got it right this time, from your point of view, Dan's arguments
> are not accurate because IR never intended to be anything else anyway.
> PNaCl, OpenCL, RenderScript, Java-like VMs were aggregated over time
> and tried to use IR for what it was not designed to be. I completely
> agree with you in that one.

Hi Renato,

I think you're overreacting here.  There is nothing about OpenCL, RenderScript,
or VMKit that requires LLVM IR be used like a Platform, as I defined it in my
first paragraph.  I'm aware that some people would like to use LLVM IR as a
Platform, and I'm saying that there are important high-level considerations
to make before doing so, and my impression is that there is little discussion of
issues I consider important.

Possibly it's too late for some though, and possibly people are getting too
caught up on the thorny ABI issues and missing my broader ideas.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list