[LLVMdev] C Backend's future

[John Criswell]

On 11/15/10 11:17 AM, David A. Greene wrote:
> Duncan Sands<baldrick at free.fr>  writes:
>
>>> There's a big reason to keep it.  It's a godsend when trying to bugpoint
>>> something where no working llc is available.  I've used it quite a lot
>>> during AVX development, for example.  It's useful for developing any
>>> new target.
>> an alternative is to make the interpreter more powerful and have bugpoint
>> use it rather than the C backend.
> That would actually be better.  I've never tried the interpreter.  Do
> you have a sense of what's needed to make it more powerful?

Are you sure that this is a good idea?  The interpreter (if it is made 
to work) will probably be much, much slower than the C backend.

Since both the interpreter and the CBE need some love and care to work 
again, it may be better to exert effort on the CBE.

-- John T.

>                                        -Dave
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev