3 ms·
That's not really a fair comparison as libfirm implements a much simpler problem : C compilation. Llvm implements generic compilation with implementations for
by waps 14y ago
That's not really a fair comparison as libfirm implements a much simpler problem : C compilation.
Llvm implements generic compilation with implementations for C, C++, Objective C, Objective C++, Ada, D, Fortran, Haskell, Java bytecode, CIL, MacRuby, Standard ML.
Of course there is a difference in complexity.
- 4ad 14y agoCompletely untrue. LLVM implement compilation for LLVM bytecode. Clang and other compiler that translate C++ or any other language to LLVM bytecode are not part of LLVM.
- qznc 14y agoIt is not that hard to convert Firm to LLVM or vice versa. If you can read german, a student once implemented this [0]. This allowed libfirm to compile C++ and Fortran code using the corresponding LLVM frontends. Libfirm (with liboo extension) does not support exceptions, but apart from that there should be little difference in features. For example, there is an experimental frontend for Java bytecode [1]. It compiles ahead-of-time, like gcj. [0] http://pp.info.uni-karlsruhe.de/uploads/publikationen/liebe10studienarbeit.pdf http://pp.info.uni-karlsruhe.de/uploads/publikationen/liebe1... [1] https://github.com/MatzeB/bytecode2firm https://github.com/MatzeB/bytecode2firm