File for divorce from LLVM
github.com
File for divorce from LLVM
1–10 of 167 posts
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#2While on one hand, I admire the fastidious desire to reduce dependencies, the trade offs seem pretty dire.
The loss of C++ compatibility effectively removes the biggest thing that my Zig fan friends mention to me.
The loss of performance (however temporary they say) is the other piece they mention.
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#3While on one hand, I admire the fastidious desire to reduce dependencies, the trade offs seem pretty dire. The loss of C++ compatibility effectively removes the biggest thing that my Zig fan friends mention to me. The loss of performance (however temporary they say) is the other piece they mention.
Yeah it seems like most of the responses are against this proposal
For casual readers, it's a proposal, not something decided
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#4The correct time to build something without LLVM was years ago, but taking the C++ functionality out now will probably be the end of Zig. I'm surprised they didn't announce a plan to write their own C++ compiler in Zig instead of phasing it out.
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#5Every time I hear about LLVM, it turns into a rant. Clearly there is a problem there that needs to be fixed. Maybe the LLVM project team should address those issues.
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#6With the amount Zig promoted being able to use it to compile c (and maybe c++ I forget) only to decide no LLVM at all seems wild. Without a LOT more people chipping in to support the odds of even coming close to the platform support of LLVM seems incredibly unlikely as well. I would understand planning to add another backend of their own for those who want that, but just getting rid of LLVM seems... rash?
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#7The correct time to build something without LLVM was years ago, but taking the C++ functionality out now will probably be the end of Zig. I'm surprised they didn't announce a plan to write their own C++ compiler in Zig instead of phasing it out.
Just writing a parser for C++ is a gargantuan project. I'm not even sure if an individual can write a C++ compiler if they started on their 18th birthday. There may not be enough hours left in their life to write a functioning compiler.
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#8While on one hand, I admire the fastidious desire to reduce dependencies, the trade offs seem pretty dire. The loss of C++ compatibility effectively removes the biggest thing that my Zig fan friends mention to me. The loss of performance (however temporary they say) is the other piece they mention.
Yeah it seems like most of the responses are against this proposal For casual readers, it's a proposal, not something decided
Sure, but it's a proposal from Andrew Kelley, the language creator, and it's got a bunch of thought-out subitems that seem to have real progress being made. It seems more likely than not that this will come to pass, unless the community reaction really is heavily against.
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#9Did they consider MLIR ? If not, Did they mention why?
Re: File for divorce from LLVM
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah it seems like most of the responses are against this proposal For casual readers, it's a proposal, not something decided
Sure, but it's a proposal from Andrew Kelley, the language creator, and it's got a bunch of thought-out subitems that seem to have real progress being made. It seems more likely than not that this will come to pass, unless the community reaction really is heavily against.
[deleted]