On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 15:03, Chris Lattner wrote:> > Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, > > some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have > > strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C mean?I dunno. Perhaps cause Misha liked it. But, you do have a point there. For that matter, why llvmc? Its more than a compiler. It also (and mainly) links and optimizes. So, why not just "llvm" ? Reid. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20040802/2c213714/attachment.sig>
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:23:06PM -0500, Chris Lattner wrote:> > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > > > > > Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C mean? > > > > I dunno. Perhaps cause Misha liked it. But, you do have a point there.LLVMCC = LLVM Compiler Collection, a la GCC After all, it's going to be the "driver", like GCC, and unify front-ends, so I should be able to do: % llvmcc a.java -o a.o % llvmcc b.cpp -o b.o Right?> > For that matter, why llvmc? Its more than a compiler. It also (and > > mainly) links and optimizes. So, why not just "llvm" ?LOC : LLVM Optimizing Compiler. :) In case LOC doesn't have enough meanings already...> Hrm, I don't think we want to overload "llvm" to mean > yet-another-concept.I agree, but everyone at some point starts thinking of 'LLVM' as *the* compiler, so perhaps people ALREADY have that viewpoint.> It's already the name of the project and the IR... this causes enough > confusion as it is. What trouble could one extra little 'c' cause? :)I think some terminology clarification would be in order... :) -- Misha Brukman :: http://misha.brukman.net :: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote:> On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 15:03, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, > > > some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have > > > strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! > > > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > > > Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C mean? > > I dunno. Perhaps cause Misha liked it. But, you do have a point there. > > For that matter, why llvmc? Its more than a compiler. It also (and > mainly) links and optimizes. So, why not just "llvm" ?Hrm, I don't think we want to overload "llvm" to mean yet-another-concept. It's already the name of the project and the IR... this causes enough confusion as it is. What trouble could one extra little 'c' cause? :) -Chris -- http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/ http://nondot.org/sabre/
> > > Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, > > > some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have > > > strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! > > > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > > > Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C mean? > > I dunno. Perhaps cause Misha liked it. But, you do have a point there. > > For that matter, why llvmc? Its more than a compiler. It also (and > mainly) links and optimizes. So, why not just "llvm" ?How about you leave it as llvmc for now and when its functioning you can revisit this subject. Seems like a minor thing to waste time discussing. -Tanya
On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 17:24, Tanya Brethour wrote:> How about you leave it as llvmc for now and when its functioning you can > revisit this subject. Seems like a minor thing to waste time discussing. >Perhaps, but I have to create directories and documents and content for those things that use this name. I really don't want to go back and revisit everything I'm about to write. Not that its hard, its just a pain. Reid. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20040802/f46731e1/attachment.sig>