[LLVMdev] JVM Backend

[David Roberts]

> How do you handle tail calls and value types?
I haven't worried too much about optimisation yet, so it doesn't do
anything special for tail calls (although neither does the java
compiler). LLVM types are translated to their equivalent java
primitive type (or currently it raises an assertion if there is no
equivalent type).

--
David Roberts
http://da.vidr.cc/



On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 02:56, Jon Harrop <jon at ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> On Friday 27 November 2009 05:55:59 David Roberts wrote:
>> > If you translate to a big array of memory and index into it, how is it
>> > better than the mips -> java compiler?
>>
>> Yes, it is similar to the mips to java compiler in that regard, but it
>> does have several advantages over it. For example, functions are
>> mapped to individual methods (rather than just a big chunk of
>> translated instructions), allowing Java to call individual functions
>> in the compiled language and vice versa. This also allows programs to
>> be split amongst multiple classes rather than statically linking
>> everything into the one file (which is sometimes not possible for
>> large projects).
>
> How do you handle tail calls and value types?
>
> --
> Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
> http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>