Re: [Libjit-developers] libjit vs LLVM

[Chris Lattner]

On Fri, 28 May 2004, Rhys Weatherley wrote:
> I was going strictly by the documentation on your Web site.  From that
> documentation, it appeared that LLVM had more in common with Parrot's imcc
> mechanism than libjit.  I apologise if this is incorrect.

Interesting?  Can you point out the doc that gave you this impression?  I
would really like to fix it.  :)

> Libjit deliberately avoids intermediate on-disk formats.  Deliberately.  It
> was a primary design goal.  That makes it less flexible than LLVM in some
> ways, but (I believe) more useful to VM authors in others in that there are
> fewer assumptions as to how the execution core will be used.  That's my
> opinion, and you are certainly welcome to disagree.

I don't understand at all how it limits you.  The LLVM in-memory, .ll, and
.bc files are all exactly equivalent in their representation.

> Unfortunately, your Web site requires me to register to download the sources,
> so it is difficult for me to investigate the sources to compare further.
> As a matter of policy, I refuse to give up my privacy to download what is
> apparently open source software.  I will be unable to compare the two systems
> further until you give me a direct URL for the source .tar.gz file.

Sure, there are many options.  You can browse:
The doxygen docs: http://llvm.org/doxygen/
The cvsweb: http://llvm.org/cvsweb/cvsweb.cgi/llvm/

Or you can fill in garbage in the download page.  I'll email you off list
with a direct link.

-Chris

-- 
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/
http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/Projects/