[LLVMdev] me being stupid: me vs the llvm codebase...

[Chris Lattner]

On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, BGB wrote:
> even more interestingly: if the same compiler were also used for static 
> compilation, it could be used as a special feature to make such dynamic 
> movability available even for statically compiled and linked code (as 
> is, in my case, parts of the app which are statically compiled and 
> linked, can't currently be relinked...).

LLVM handles function pointers currently.  It just overwrites the first 
instruction of the old code with an unconditional branch to the new 
implementation.  Thus, any code branching to the old location will still 
work.

It would be possible to implement more aggressive solutions, and if you 
are interested, llvmdev is a great place to talk about how to do it.

Are you interested in using LLVM for your project?  If not, llvmdev isn't 
a very appropriate place to talk about your project.  If you are, this is 
a great place to ask questions or discuss design issues of LLVM itself.

-Chris

-- 
http://nondot.org/sabre/
http://llvm.org/