5 ms·
I'm not sure if those priorities are in the right place. For example, clang compilation times have slowed down something like 5-6x faster than the code they ge
by VHRanger 2y ago
I'm not sure if those priorities are in the right place.
For example, clang compilation times have slowed down something like 5-6x faster than the code they generate.
As a developer I can come up with better structure in my code much faster if I can try more things out in a day.
Now we want to add LLMs of all things in there? I'm not looking forward to code taking one or two orders of magnitude longer to compile
- efferifick 2y agoI am not sure why you mention LLM, the post mentions LLVM. Second, you can have different optimization options with different tradeoffs in compile-time and run-time. Third, even if the default and only options distributed with clang are too compile-time intensive, the good news is that this is open source and you could argue against it, or fork and maintain your own compile-time run-time tradeoff compiler along with other people who also want that behaviour. I don't see any benefit of arguing against research. Having new techniques to improve compilers is not a zero sum game.
- lastgeniusua 2y agoThe LLM confusion (aside from the similar name) might also have come from the "Transformers" discussed in one of the papers linked.