Diego Novillo wrote: > Roberto COSTA wrote on 06/12/06 03:50: > > > Every so often CIL looks to poke in the works of the mailing list, but I > > haven't been able to track the current status of the discussion on the > > topic. > > > We have started work on a bytecode representation that will initially be > used for link-time optimizations (search the archives for LTO). The > Wiki has a brief description of the cleanup work needed for it > (http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/LinkTimeCleanups).
This page has no discussion about a CIL backend. The document in which Mark has announced the LTO briefly mentions that CIL was not retained for dumping the IR, without giving an explicit reason, so I think that we need a clear position from the FSF whether such a backend is accepted to be part of GCC. We will also have to consider what these people might bring in terms of compiler optimizations to GCC, as they want a highly optimized CIL bytecode. Finally I think that we could discuss how to implement a CIL generator without duplicating the work needed for dumping the IRs to file. Sebastian
