4 ms·
This is one reason I'd like to see the removed LLVM C backend brought back and modernized, with Rust as the source language. Rust is safe, has no mandatory gar
by comex 13y ago
This is one reason I'd like to see the removed LLVM C backend brought back and modernized, with Rust as the source language. Rust is safe, has no mandatory garbage collector, and has a much lower impedance mismatch with C or C++ than most higher level languages, so it should work well for libraries that are expected to integrate with C code.
- stormbrew 13y ago> removed LLVM C backend What are you referring to here?
- Athas 13y agoLLVM used to have a backend that could convert its low-level bitcode to portable C.
- andrewaylett 13y agoI'm not clear why you'd want to compile your rust down to C, only to then compile that C again? Surely you're better off with a single compiler invocation, and taking rust straight to object code? I know that historically it's been easier to write a code generator than a compiler backend, but with LLVM you get the backend just as cheaply as the code gen.
- lmb 13y agoMakes it easier to target embedded arches. For example, LLVM doesn't target the MSP430 from TI, but there is a gcc fork for it. Sure, you can write a new backend for LLVM, but that's a whole different ballgame. This way it would be Rust -> LLVM IR -> C -> GCC for MSP430.