4 ms·
Yeah, though the solution for it basically seems to be "throw out all the previous code that was highly coupled with LLVM and actually write our own fast JIT co
by lasagnaphil 5y ago
Yeah, though the solution for it basically seems to be "throw out all the previous code that was highly coupled with LLVM and actually write our own fast JIT compiler and interpreter from the ground up". It's possible, but probably takes an incredible amount of work and would maybe involve cloning a copy of Mike Pall (the creator of LuaJIT) to help on the project.
- snicker7 5y agoI don't think you need to rebuild the compiler. Here is a proposal how how this can be done using the work to compile Julia for GPU's: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rLpZf-HK6b9uYPDT_piUza4LUhtIrLbUftGa_YaXGKQ/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rLpZf-HK6b9uYPDT_piUza4L...
- lasagnaphil 5y agoMy response's more about the dynamic execution side of things (latency & memory bloat of Julia). Static compilation is a whole different topic, but I'm confident that it can be solved with existing LLVM infrastructure (because what's LLVM good at? static compilation!) The hardest part may be how to modify Julia's semantics to fit that paradigm (for instance, the need to introduce "header files" in the language, and all the gnarly details coming with it)