[LLVMdev] Preferring to use GCC instead of LLVM

[Óscar Fuentes]

Not that I sympathize with the OP's manners but...

Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> writes:

> On May 10, 2008, at 7:55 PM, kr512 wrote:
>
>> See how gcc is invoked to generate the final executable
>> file.  This means LLVM is an incomplete backend,
>> unfortunately.
>>
> That's only a convenience. GCC generates assembly code too and calls  
> the assembler and linker as part of it's execution. You are perfectly  
> able to call the assembler & linker yourself.

This means that LLVM requires an assembler and linker. Call it GCC or
binutils, it is irrelevant. The OP point is that LLVM is not a
self-sufficient tool on this aspect.

Of course, if this is a serious problem for the OP, the correct way of
dealing with it is to take constructive, polite actions for correcting
it :-)

>> Bill Wendling wrote:
>>> I don't know about your computer, by mine comes with an
>>> assembler.
>>
>> MS Windows does not come with an assembler, AFAIK.
>>
> You should really learn how to use Google. Got this as the top hit for  
> "Microsoft Assembler":
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=7a1c9da0-0510-44a2-b042-7ef370530c64&displaylang=en

This does not *comes* with MS Windows. It is a separate download, which
depends on more downloads (Visual C++ Express Edition) and is for
non-commercial use only. Furthermore, you can't re-distribute it.

OTOH, I'm curious about why the OP needs to produce dlls on the
fly. Isn't the JIT ok?

-- 
Oscar