LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
1–10 of 44 posts
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#2Mailing list post: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2015-April/084459...
And also check out LLVMSharp -- http://www.llvmsharp.org which gives LLVM access to .NET
Disclaimer: I'm involved in both projects.
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#3I'm surprised it's hosted by the .NET Foundation. I feel the .NET Foundation operates somewhat independently from Microsoft, but there is a large alignment with what Microsoft wants. Using LLVM feels like a departure from some of the things they're working on now.
Some blog posts I have read on the MSDN Developer Tools Blogs suggested Microsoft was already working on their own AOT compiler, this statement seems to suggest LLILC has not been developed for this purpose yet. So it's an independent project?
> Today LLILC is being developed against dotnet/CoreCLR for use as a JIT, but an ahead of time (AOT) compiler is planned for the future
Which doesn't make much sense to me, unless Microsoft is planning on ditching their existing AOT work for LLVM. (Fine by me, LLVM is quite nice.)
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#4I'm surprised it's hosted by the .NET Foundation. I feel the .NET Foundation operates somewhat independently from Microsoft, but there is a large alignment with what Microsoft wants. Using LLVM feels like a departure from some of the things they're working on now. Some blog posts I have read on the MSDN Developer Tools Blogs suggested Microsoft was already working on their own AOT compiler, this statement seems to su…
Having multiple code generators is not mutually exclusive, and this effort does not mean MSFT is ditching any existing AOT (or for that matter JIT) compiler projects.
One of LLILC's major objective is give the community an MSIL frontend for LLVM.
This allows a JIT or an AOT compiler to take any C# program written for the .NET Core class libraries to run on any platform that CoreCLR can be ported to and that LLVM will target.
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#5I'm surprised it's hosted by the .NET Foundation. I feel the .NET Foundation operates somewhat independently from Microsoft, but there is a large alignment with what Microsoft wants. Using LLVM feels like a departure from some of the things they're working on now. Some blog posts I have read on the MSDN Developer Tools Blogs suggested Microsoft was already working on their own AOT compiler, this statement seems to su…
Having multiple code generators is not mutually exclusive, and this effort does not mean MSFT is ditching any existing AOT (or for that matter JIT) compiler projects. One of LLILC's major objective is give the community an MSIL frontend for LLVM. This allows a JIT or an AOT compiler to take any C# program written for the .NET Core class libraries to run on any platform that CoreCLR can be ported to and that LLVM will…
This seems like it would be an interesting alternative to il2cpp from the Unity folks as a path towards compiling C# code to run on asm.js in the browser.
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having multiple code generators is not mutually exclusive, and this effort does not mean MSFT is ditching any existing AOT (or for that matter JIT) compiler projects. One of LLILC's major objective is give the community an MSIL frontend for LLVM. This allows a JIT or an AOT compiler to take any C# program written for the .NET Core class libraries to run on any platform that CoreCLR can be ported to and that LLVM will…
This seems like it would be an interesting alternative to il2cpp from the Unity folks as a path towards compiling C# code to run on asm.js in the browser.
very interesting :)
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#7It seems the pace of .Net improvement is moving much faster then the JVM land.
What are the chances of Enterprise switching to .Net instead of Java?
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#8It seems the pace of .Net improvement is moving much faster then the JVM land. What are the chances of Enterprise switching to .Net instead of Java?
.NET improving faster than the JVM would be a very hard thing to measure or even estimate. There are very exciting and impressive things happening in JVM land, for example Graal and Truffle.
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#9I wonder how this will affect Mono/Xamarian, given that LLILC has commited to providing an AoT compiler. It would nice to see a CLR frontend for LLVM that cooperates more closely with LLVM upstream. Mono's fork of LLVM is about a 3.4k line diff (mostly EH additions, few -/+ modifications) but they don't seem to actively try to upstream much.
Edit: I gave up trying to build a Linux-x86_64 to Android-ARM cross-compiled Mono a year ago. The configure script didn't even think of handling bitness differences between host and target... The commerical Xamarian toolchain for AoT iOS compilation seems more mature than what is released in Mono.
Re: LLILC – LLVM-Based Compiler for .NET CoreCLR
#10It seems the pace of .Net improvement is moving much faster then the JVM land. What are the chances of Enterprise switching to .Net instead of Java?
The C# language has improved considerably over the years when compared to Java. It will take some time before everything is ported over, opened sourced and running on Linux however, once that happens, I wouldn't be surprised if companies start experimenting with it. It's going to take along time before anyone would really switch I think considering so much JVM is built up but as long as the performance is at least similar (better would be awesome) I don't see why people wouldn't at least toy with the idea of migrating.