This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: CIL back-end

Diego Novillo wrote:
Sebastian Pop wrote on 06/12/06 12:40:

This page has no discussion about a CIL backend.

Note that I never said 'CIL'. I specifically said 'bytecode representation'. The work being done for LTO will have some points in common with an effort to build a CIL backend.

The document in which Mark has announced the LTO briefly mentions that CIL was not retained for dumping the IR, without giving an explicit reason, so I think that we need a clear position from the FSF whether such a backend is accepted to be part of GCC.

Yes, that's true. If anyone is interested in contributing a CIL backend, the FSF would have to approve it. That's not a decision we can make in this list.

It looks like you don't assume such an approval as granted... may I ask you why?

To avoid misunderstandings, I want to make clear that the intent of my post is to propose a CIL back-end, not to suggest CIL as a bytecode internal representation for link-time optimizations, nor to use CIL to bump GCC internal representation and to circumvent GPL restrictions.
(Of course, if there are points in common between a CIL back-end and efforts to build a bytecode representation, it may interesting to share the infrastructure, or parts of it).

What I need is to produce highly optimized CIL from plain C code, nothing more, nothing less.
In this sense, such a CIL back-end looks to me not much different from Java back-end that, to the best of my knowledge, is already included in gjc.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]