Joke's on you, LLVM IR already has C-compatible semantics. :cry:
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The temptation comes from ability to support targets/backends not supported by LLVM. I'd love rustc to have a C source back-end, so that I can target e.g. AVR without waiting for the almost-ready-now Rust fork forever.
-
I wanted to do an Arduino project and I said to myself "I'll wait until the Rust AVR backend is ready." This was when Obama was still president
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don't think that the syntax of pretty-printed IR is the most significant driver here, which I think comes down to two things:
-
1. Reduced start-up costs to build a prototype. It's easier to throw something together just generating C with no need to worry about wrangling an LLVM setup (or learning LLVM, potentially). But once that's been done, path dependence shows up
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
those same people will target the text representation of IR, instead of the c/c++ api. those same people built flang.https://twitter.com/jon_roelofs/status/865373779056369665?s=21 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think you may be overestimating the number of people who want a library dependency that takes two hours to compile.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.