[LLVMdev] Should LLVM JIT default to lazy or non-lazy?

[Renato Golin]

2009/10/28 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>:
> I think that this is a great idea.  Instead of making "lazy or not" be a
> policy maintained by the JIT, why don't we approach this as a bug in the
> current API.  Perhaps we should remove getPointerToFunction() and introduce
> two new methods (one lazy and one eager)?

Didn't want to sound too radical, but that'd be my approach... ;)

cheers,
--renato

Reclaim your digital rights, eliminate DRM, learn more at
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm