On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Just to be clear, this is not a problem with IMA, this is a problem with
doing it at the source level.
I completely agree. In GCC, the current IMA stuff is sort-of halfway
in-between. The representation we use is basically at the source level,
but, as Geoff mentions, we don't quite fully squish everything together
into one translation unit. So, it's pretty similar to C, but if there
were a source language for this representation, it would also have some
kind of "module" construct.
It is also worth considering how support for Java, Fortran, Ada, ... will
be effected by the IMA work in general. If you really want to do IMA, it
will be important to *nail down* exactly what the representation looks
like.