On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 12:01 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Dec 16, 2005, at 11:47 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 11:27 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote:
> >> On Dec 16, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Mark K. Smith wrote:
> >>> Additionally to the obstacles to adopt LLVM mentioned by Diego, I
On Dec 16, 2005, at 11:47 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 11:27 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote:
On Dec 16, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Mark K. Smith wrote:
Additionally to the obstacles to adopt LLVM mentioned by Diego, I
named usage of C++ (although it has advantages too) and patents.
LL
On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 11:27 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Dec 16, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Mark K. Smith wrote:
> > Additionally to the obstacles to adopt LLVM mentioned by Diego, I
> > named usage of C++ (although it has advantages too) and patents. LLVM
> > should be checked for usage of compiler pa
On Dec 16, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Mark K. Smith wrote:
Additionally to the obstacles to adopt LLVM mentioned by Diego, I
named usage of C++ (although it has advantages too) and patents. LLVM
should be checked for usage of compiler patents. Gcc people avoided
many patents especially from Microsoft. We
ON THE CALL: Shin-ming Liu (HP), Vladimir Makarov (Red Hat), Diego
Novillo (Red Hat), Mark Smith (Gelato), Bob Kidd (UIUC), Mark Davis
(Intel)
A fair amount of time was spent discussing the pros and cons of LLVM
vs. LTO. Keep in mind that the next Gelato conference is coming up in
April 06. If you
