[llvm-dev] LLD status update and performance chart

[Hal Finkel via llvm-dev]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rafael Avila de Espindola" <rafael.espindola at gmail.com>
> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>
> Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Mehdi Amini" <mehdi.amini at apple.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 12:46:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] LLD status update and performance chart
> 
> Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> writes:
> > But this is not a technical argument. As a project, we rarely write
> > programs, as such. We generally create reusable components that
> > happen to have driver executables. At least long term, I think
> > there's consensus that this is the best path. If we're going to
> > make a different choice in this case, we need concrete reasons. We
> > should discuss this in the context of the reasons you've provided
> > (error handling, etc.).
> 
> We are not in a position no judge and will not be until the linker is
> done. From what library support we have I think that was a horrible
> mistake with a disproportionate cost.
> 
> *Once* the linker is done,

I think this seems like a dangerous predicate. I've very rarely worked on a software project that reached the state of "done", even in terms of core features.

> if someone is able to first define what a
> modular linker means, write a patch for it and show that it doesn't
> degrade the linker performance or maintainability that is awesome.
> But
> we don't have a linker yet, so,

lld can self host and work is actively proceeding on various optimizations. That definitely seems done enough so that if someone were to, "define what a modular linker means, write a patch for it and show that it doesn't degrade the linker performance or maintainability", then it is time to discuss it.

> *PLEASE* let us write a linker. I
> don't
> agree with how other parts of llvm are written but I don't keep
> permanently nagging people do implement it the way *I* think is
> correct.

If you were to propose patches to address your concerns, we would definitely consider them as well.

Thanks again,
Hal

> 
> Cheers,
> Rafael
> 

-- 
Hal Finkel
Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory