Hello Everyone
I wanted to let you know that if there is someone interested in
working on the libJIT approach instead of using LLVM overkill under a
Google Summer of Code code project and more general on this topic or
as a diploma I am ready to mentor and help with this.
Thanks,
Kirill
2009/4/
David Edelsohn wrote:
>> My explanations seem to have also failed to explain you.
>> Unfortunately, one really needs have some back group with both
>> Just-In-Time compilers,Virtual Machines, and Common Intermediate
>> Language to understand this area. I understand that it is not your
>> area of e
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
I believe that Kiril mentioned in a separate post the equation
(mcs | csc | cscc) & gcc & libJIT == LLVM ?
I tend to believe that Kiril dreams of building a CLI/.NET
infrastructure and VM which uses all the powerful optimisations of GCC.
For reference to Kiril:
About the benchmarks you know what I mean I guess. That they don't
prove anything, no matter how hard other people want to prove the
inverse. Concrete figures will be in incoming research papers I am
working right now. So just don't start right now with saying give us
figures :-)
Thanks,
Kirill
Hello
After many considerations, I want to let everyone know about a release
of my work done in a package:
0.1.2.5 + / 0.1.2 1/2 version release (code name: "libJIT-ON-TESTOSTERONE")
* main branch + libJIT-linear-scan-register-allocator
* Add optimization levels for IA-32 from
I have been criticized for inserting a mail from a public mail list
into this mail list. My position is that if a guy contradicts himself
in two different public mail lists, it is a reason to point to this.
Public mail list is a 'public' mail list. It is a source of reference,
for books for example
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Kirill Kononenko writes:
There have been mentioned a couple of ideas indeed. But I would not
like to spend a lot of my precious time on telling my thoughts and
suggestions, if the topic is already decided elsewhere. So I basically
want asking question which exactly J
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 10:54, Kirill Kononenko
wrote:
> What I want to identify is how both a VM engine(ILDJIT,
> .NET for example, Mono, Portable.NET), gcc and libJIT could be
> extended with minimal changes to both, for best user experience for
> example, is it speed performance, benchmark, cod
Hi Ian,
Thank you a lot for your reply.
>
>> There have been mentioned a couple of ideas indeed. But I would not
>> like to spend a lot of my precious time on telling my thoughts and
>> suggestions, if the topic is already decided elsewhere. So I basically
>> want asking question which exactly J
Kirill Kononenko writes:
> There have been mentioned a couple of ideas indeed. But I would not
> like to spend a lot of my precious time on telling my thoughts and
> suggestions, if the topic is already decided elsewhere. So I basically
> want asking question which exactly JITing support GCC need
There have been mentioned a couple of ideas indeed. But I would not
like to spend a lot of my precious time on telling my thoughts and
suggestions, if the topic is already decided elsewhere. So I basically
want asking question which exactly JITing support GCC needs, that I
don't spend my time in th
Kirill Kononenko wrote:
> Do I understand it correctly that there are no useful thoughts or
> ideas with-out- flaming and flooding about LLVM?
I will admit that I don't have any ideas, but I thought there were a couple
of positive suggestions in there.
It's possible there's a bit of "library
Do I understand it correctly that there are no useful thoughts or
ideas with-out- flaming and flooding about LLVM?
Thanks,
Kirill
>
> 2009/4/1 Kirill Kononenko :
>> Please, let collect together all useful ideas and concrete thoughts? I
>> am sure many people already have thought about which JIT
Hello Everyone
Do I understand it correctly that there are no useful thoughts or
ideas with flamimg and flooding about LLVM?
Thanks,
Kirill
2009/4/1 Kirill Kononenko :
> Please, let collect together all useful ideas and concrete thoughts? I
> am sure many people already have thought about whic
Please, let collect together all useful ideas and concrete thoughts? I
am sure many people already have thought about which JITing support
GCC users need. I also do have my thoughts about this research topic
but I would like also to have useful feedback from people who also
understand this research
2009/4/1 Daniel Berlin :
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Kirill Kononenko
> wrote:
>> Hello Dear GCC Developers,
>>
>>
>>
>> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
>> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
>> same way as libffi is int
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Kirill Kononenko
wrote:
> Hello Dear GCC Developers,
>
>
>
> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
> same way as libffi is integrated within gcc source tree. It s
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 06:54:55PM +0200, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> 2009/4/1 Kirill Kononenko :
> >
> > This is what Chris Lattner wrote a couple of years ago. Now I see an
> > exactly contradiction:
> >
>
> Please, could you pinpoint side-by-side the two sentences that
> contradict each other
2009/4/1 Kirill Kononenko :
>
> This is what Chris Lattner wrote a couple of years ago. Now I see an
> exactly contradiction:
>
Please, could you pinpoint side-by-side the two sentences that
contradict each other and later give links to (or quote) the context?
I am having troubling identifying the
>>> It seems to
>>> me that LLVM solves many goals that are already complete and solved in
>>> GCC. So I think libJIT potentially is more useful for GCC and software
>>> developers.
>>
>> but you don't say what libjit would be more useful than, or how this
>> overlap
>> between "solved goals" betwe
On Apr 1, 2009, at 5:09 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
It seems to
me that LLVM solves many goals that are already complete and solved
in
GCC. So I think libJIT potentially is more useful for GCC and
software
developers.
but you don't say what libjit would be more useful than, or how this
overlap
>>> My explanations seem to have also failed to explain you.
>>> Unfortunately, one really needs have some back group with both
>>> Just-In-Time compilers,Virtual Machines, and Common Intermediate
>>> Language to understand this area. I understand that it is not your
>>> area of expertise, so it is
>
>> My explanations seem to have also failed to explain you.
>> Unfortunately, one really needs have some back group with both
>> Just-In-Time compilers,Virtual Machines, and Common Intermediate
>> Language to understand this area. I understand that it is not your
>> area of expertise, so it is no
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Kirill Kononenko
wrote:
> My explanations seem to have also failed to explain you.
> Unfortunately, one really needs have some back group with both
> Just-In-Time compilers,Virtual Machines, and Common Intermediate
> Language to understand this area. I understand t
>> Kirill and Andrew wrote:
>>
"April Fool's joke"
>>> "not your area of expertise"
>>
>> Maybe it would be for the best if you two started over, before this turns
>> sour.
>
> I'm out of here already! All I can say is that I hope my boss never finds
> out that virtual machines and JITs ar
Dave Korn wrote:
> Kirill and Andrew wrote:
>
>>> "April Fool's joke"
>> "not your area of expertise"
>
> Maybe it would be for the best if you two started over, before this turns
> sour.
I'm out of here already! All I can say is that I hope my boss never finds
out that virtual machines and
2009/4/1 Dave Korn :
>> LLVM is an overkill for JIT compilation. I think the tasks which LLVM
>> solves are already solved within GCC transformations, or can be
>> integrated very easily with libJIT. LibJIT is also much easier in
>> usage, for ordinary developers. So what I see here, LLVM is rather
Kirill and Andrew wrote:
>> "April Fool's joke"
> "not your area of expertise"
Maybe it would be for the best if you two started over, before this turns
sour.
cheers,
DaveK
Kirill Kononenko wrote:
> LLVM is an overkill for JIT compilation. I think the tasks which LLVM
> solves are already solved within GCC transformations, or can be
> integrated very easily with libJIT. LibJIT is also much easier in
> usage, for ordinary developers. So what I see here, LLVM is rather
2009/4/1 Basile STARYNKEVITCH :
>>>
>>> The second issue (which perhaps Kirill did not thought of) would be to
>>> accelerate some internal optimisations of GCC by using JIT-code
>>> generation
>>> techniques within the compiler itself. There are several occasions within
>>> GCC where complex inter
>> The second issue (which perhaps Kirill did not thought of) would be to
>> accelerate some internal optimisations of GCC by using JIT-code
>> generation techniques within the compiler itself. There are several
>> occasions within GCC where complex internal processing happens, and one
>> could ima
2009/4/1 Dave Korn :
> Kirill Kononenko wrote:
2009/4/1 Andrew Haley:
> Kirill Kononenko wrote:
>
>> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
>> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
>> same way as libffi is integ
Kirill Kononenko wrote (citing me Basile)
The second issue (which perhaps Kirill did not thought of) would be to
accelerate some internal optimisations of GCC by using JIT-code generation
techniques within the compiler itself. There are several occasions within
GCC where complex internal process
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> The second issue (which perhaps Kirill did not thought of) would be to
> accelerate some internal optimisations of GCC by using JIT-code
> generation techniques within the compiler itself. There are several
> occasions within GCC where complex internal processing happ
Kirill Kononenko wrote:
>>> 2009/4/1 Andrew Haley:
Kirill Kononenko wrote:
> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
> same way as libffi is integrated within gcc source tree.
> However, I see several interesting issues raised here:
>
> the first is to [re-]use GCC for just in time compilation, for instance to
> JIT-compile CLI or JVM bytecode into machine code, or even C or some
> specialized gimple-like representation into machine code, or CLISP into
> machine code, al
Andrew Haley wrote:
Useful for what? I think you have to tell us how this will improve the
experience of gcc users .
Kirill Kononenko wrote:
More useful in implementation of Just-In-Time compilation in Virtual
Machine runtimes. For example, for Microsoft Common Intermediate
Language
2009/4/1 Andrew Haley :
> Kirill Kononenko wrote:
2009/4/1 Andrew Haley :
> Kirill Kononenko wrote:
>
>> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
>> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
>> same way as libffi is i
Kirill Kononenko wrote:
>>> 2009/4/1 Andrew Haley :
Kirill Kononenko wrote:
> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
> same way as libffi is integrated within gcc source tree
>> 2009/4/1 Andrew Haley :
>>> Kirill Kononenko wrote:
>>>
I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
same way as libffi is integrated within gcc source tree. It seems to
me that LLV
> 2009/4/1 Andrew Haley :
>> Kirill Kononenko wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
>>> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
>>> same way as libffi is integrated within gcc source tree. It seems to
>>> me that LLVM solve
More useful in implementation of Just-In-Time compilation in Virtual
Machine runtimes. For example, for Microsoft Common Intermediate
Language (.NET).
Thanks,
Kirill
2009/4/1 Andrew Haley :
> Kirill Kononenko wrote:
>
>> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
>> th
Kirill Kononenko wrote:
> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
> same way as libffi is integrated within gcc source tree. It seems to
> me that LLVM solves many goals that are already complete
And no this is not a 1st April joke :-)
Thanks,
Kirill
2009/4/1 Kirill Kononenko :
> Hello Dear GCC Developers,
>
>
>
> I would like to ask your opinion about possibility for integration of
> the libJIT Just-In-Time compilation library and GCC. For example, the
> same way as libffi is integrate
44 matches
Mail list logo
