[llvm-dev] LLD status update and performance chart

[Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev]

Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> writes:

>> On Dec 13, 2016, at 9:40 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> writes:
>> 
>>>> On Dec 13, 2016, at 5:55 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Sean Silva via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
>>>>> This will also greatly facilitate certain measurements I'd like to do
>>>>> w.r.t. different strategies for avoiding memory costs for input files (esp.
>>>>> minor faults and dTLB costs). I've almost gotten to the point of
>>>>> implementing this just to do those measurements.
>>>> 
>>>> If you do please keep it local. The bare minimum we have of library
>>>> support is already disproportionately painful and prevents easier sharing
>>>> with COFF. We should really not add more until the linker is done.
>>> 
>>> This is so much in contrast with the LLVM development, I find it quite hard to see this as an acceptable position on llvm-dev. 
>> 
>> Why? What is wrong with setting priorities and observing that what
>> library support we already have has had a disproportional cost?
>
> The library-hostile lld development goes against one the core principles that, I believe, drives the LLVM development: providing libraries and reusable components.

Because it is trying to do something fundamentally different. We are
trying to write a *program*.

Cheers,
Rafael