3 ms·
> Well, for a start there's the problem that LLVM itself is architecture-dependent, last I checked. It's not as arhictecture-dependent as assembly but the last
by daeken 16y ago
> Well, for a start there's the problem that LLVM itself is architecture-dependent, last I checked. It's not as arhictecture-dependent as assembly but the last time I looked you couldn't generate the same LLVM on x86 and x86-64, say. Has that changed?
LLVM bytecode is 100% architecture and platform independent, unless you call into platform-specific bits or into blobs of machine code.
- bzbarsky 16y agoOK, so in that case what http://llvm.org/docs/FAQ.html#platformindependent http://llvm.org/docs/FAQ.html#platformindependent is telling me is that it's not possible to produce said LLVM bytecode from C or C++ code in general, right? And if I read http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html correctly, some bitcode is "not supported by all targets". How is that reconciled with "100% platform and architecture independent"?
- daeken 16y agoHmm, you're quite right. A better way of putting this would be: a large subset of LLVM IR is platform independent, but not all. My mistake.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]