[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions

[Chris Lattner]

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote:

> 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.

I agree, llvm-build or llvm-driver do have the handy effect of actually
meaning something. :)

-Chris


> > 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.
>
>

-Chris

-- 
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/
http://nondot.org/sabre/