[llvm-dev] LLD status update and performance chart

[Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev]

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:59 PM, Sean Silva via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Yes. Rui has bent over backwards every time a real user has come to us and
> said "we need X". The historical precedent here is that LLD is open to many
> kinds of changes, but not on theoretical grounds.
>
> Admittedly this leads to a somewhat conservative design for the linker
> w.r.t. enabling new use cases. However, having been involved directly or
> indirectly with LLD development over the last 4 or 5 years, the number of
> new use cases that have been proposed fall into a very small number of
> categories:
>
> - I want to have "main() in a library" for a static linker. LLD/ELF
> currently provides this functionality (with some unfortunate caveats w.r.t.
> re-entrancy and other stuff, but the core functionality is there, and LLD
> has catered to reasonable requests to remove or mitigate the caveats).
>

My previous understanding is that LLD is a drop in replacement for every
system linker - COFF, ELF, MACH-O, for every architecture that LLVM
supports.

1. Is what I said above in the scope of the LLD project?

2. How close is the LLD project to reaching that state?

3. Is there anything preventing "main() in a library" from supporting all
of these platforms and architectures?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20161213/0830d8b5/attachment.html>