LLVM 2.0 is expected by the end of the month.
Why would you write here about a project that today hardly breaks the future into pieces with its indefatigable development? The fact is that for sure you can also enter the future slowly, but seriously and for a long time.
Low Level Virtual Machine ( LLVM ) is the foundation for language developers. Maybe back-end, maybe middleware - decide for yourself.
So, just yesterday, in conversations over a glass of tea with friends of IT people, you explained that you are not developing your own advanced Lisp, Python, PHP, Perl, Ruby in the first place because Smartly working implementation of the language will not work. It was? Today you can be cast aside rotten virtual tomatoes only because of this excuse. In most tests , gcc4 transplanted to the LLVM engine is almost the same as the original gcc, and in many tests it hits him and hits him very seriously.
')
But did a two-fold increase in the speed of some kind of test at the expense of LLVM - is this a trifle that is worth buying? Probably not. The point is much more far-reaching. LLVM already allows standardized and high-quality mix languages in the application. And this is without loss of performance. And it’s also right in the run-time. The compiler and optimizer are always with you.
What is there to add? It is likely that LLVM is not married in a single language as a JVM and yet 1) is not in the service of a single proprietary context like a CLI from .NET. What else? Probably a few more, um, little things:
1. To disgrace neat architecture;
2. Incredibly constructive, talented and workable project leader Chris Lattner (Chris Lattner);
3. A community similar to its leader, where there is no room for unnecessary aplomb and flames.
Keep an eye out for them. It's worth it.
1) I would like to hope that Apple still will not get this child.
Low Level Virtual Machine ( LLVM ) is the foundation for language developers. Maybe back-end, maybe middleware - decide for yourself.
So, just yesterday, in conversations over a glass of tea with friends of IT people, you explained that you are not developing your own advanced Lisp, Python, PHP, Perl, Ruby in the first place because Smartly working implementation of the language will not work. It was? Today you can be cast aside rotten virtual tomatoes only because of this excuse. In most tests , gcc4 transplanted to the LLVM engine is almost the same as the original gcc, and in many tests it hits him and hits him very seriously.
')
But did a two-fold increase in the speed of some kind of test at the expense of LLVM - is this a trifle that is worth buying? Probably not. The point is much more far-reaching. LLVM already allows standardized and high-quality mix languages in the application. And this is without loss of performance. And it’s also right in the run-time. The compiler and optimizer are always with you.
What is there to add? It is likely that LLVM is not married in a single language as a JVM and yet 1) is not in the service of a single proprietary context like a CLI from .NET. What else? Probably a few more, um, little things:
1. To disgrace neat architecture;
2. Incredibly constructive, talented and workable project leader Chris Lattner (Chris Lattner);
3. A community similar to its leader, where there is no room for unnecessary aplomb and flames.
Keep an eye out for them. It's worth it.
1) I would like to hope that Apple still will not get this child.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/7192/
All Articles