4 ms·

>>>yes, C and C++ are more portable than LLVM C and C++ are more portable then their own compiler's backend? LLVM is clang/clang++'s assembler I get what your

>>>yes, C and C++ are more portable than LLVM C and C++ are more portable then their own compiler's backend? LLVM is clang/clang++'s assembler I get what your saying if you compile to C it can be more portable. But then you need to compile to some C standard. K&R C? ANSI C? C90? C99? C11? Why not have a compiler flag for each? What about embedded C? What companies embedded C? I can repeat this for C++ Compiling to C/C++ in a platform and standard agnostic way is impossible.

jjnoakes 10y ago
Lots of languages do it already. How is it impossible?
- valarauca1 10y ago
  No. Lots of languages can give you a dump in 1 standard of C. You can't specify what C standard, or what platform to output outside of ARM/x64. NIM, Cython, C++ (via clang), [Ada/Cobalt/Fortran]-GCC, Perl, Agol, Oracle PL/SQL only support x86_64 and ARM. Your argument was interoperability and portability 1) Rust outputs to the same object file format as C, and can be natively linked against C/C++ code. So interoperability is no issue. 2) You have no portability gain as you have 3 choices x86, x64, and ARM. All of which Rust already supports. Also your main request $ rustc your_program.rs --emit llvm-ir $ llc -march=c -o your_program.c your_program.ll or if you want C++ $ rustc your_program.rs --emit llvm-ir $ llc -march=cpp -o your_program.cpp your_program.ll
  - jjnoakes 10y ago
    Who needs more than one dialect of C or C++? I don't. Any systems I'm interested in may not support clang, but they have C11 compilers and C++14 compilers. Rust is not interoperable with C++ as far as I know, and even if it was, I'm not interested in Rust for this discussion for reasons I've mentioned elsewhere. The LLVM C backend was removed. Julia devs have a version that supports the LLVM bit code that they require, but I believe it is not everything LLVM can produce. I was under the impression that march=cpp output C++ code that rebuilt the IR, not implemented the source program. Thanks for the advice, although none of it really applies to what I'm suggesting.

jjnoakes 10y ago

Lots of languages do it already. How is it impossible?

valarauca1 10y ago
No. Lots of languages can give you a dump in 1 standard of C. You can't specify what C standard, or what platform to output outside of ARM/x64. NIM, Cython, C++ (via clang), [Ada/Cobalt/Fortran]-GCC, Perl, Agol, Oracle PL/SQL only support x86_64 and ARM. Your argument was interoperability and portability 1) Rust outputs to the same object file format as C, and can be natively linked against C/C++ code. So interoperability is no issue. 2) You have no portability gain as you have 3 choices x86, x64, and ARM. All of which Rust already supports. Also your main request $ rustc your_program.rs --emit llvm-ir $ llc -march=c -o your_program.c your_program.ll or if you want C++ $ rustc your_program.rs --emit llvm-ir $ llc -march=cpp -o your_program.cpp your_program.ll
- jjnoakes 10y ago
  Who needs more than one dialect of C or C++? I don't. Any systems I'm interested in may not support clang, but they have C11 compilers and C++14 compilers. Rust is not interoperable with C++ as far as I know, and even if it was, I'm not interested in Rust for this discussion for reasons I've mentioned elsewhere. The LLVM C backend was removed. Julia devs have a version that supports the LLVM bit code that they require, but I believe it is not everything LLVM can produce. I was under the impression that march=cpp output C++ code that rebuilt the IR, not implemented the source program. Thanks for the advice, although none of it really applies to what I'm suggesting.