[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions

[Reid Spencer]

On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 08:51, Misha Brukman wrote:

> llvm-build or llvm-driver are both kinda long but at least they make
> sense...

Yeah, that's my sense too.

> 
> As an aside, llava and llama are both taken, llvmize? llvminator?
> llvm-emerge a la gentoo?

Uh. No?

> 
> > llvm-run    - runs programs built by llvm-build
> 
> Wait, is llvm-run the same as lli?
> Or is it "compile to native, link, run native version"?
> Or does it not matter?

I've been intending llvm-run (or possibly just llvm) to be the llvmee
that Vikram spoke about. In my mind its kinda like "java" in the Java
world. It executes bytecode in a variety of ways (interpreted, JIT, or
statically compiled) and includes the life-long optimization support
coming with the reoptimizer/profiler. 

>  
> > I'm not thrilled with llvm-build because its dull but from the
> > dictionary there is also:
> > 
> > llvm-construct (too long?)
> > llvm-make        (obvious confusion)
> > llvm-forge       (obscure)
> > llvm-erect       (double entendre)
> 
> yeah, these aren't the most clear, easy-to-type-and-understand names. :)

Yeah.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20040804/630eac93/attachment.sig>