Hi list, As long as I know English the word "bit" is a "small pice", . Why in set of documentation ir is "bytecode", in other set or llvm source is "bitecode"? What is the right? Different people call the same thing such differently. -- best regards Ariel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100929/6137be2f/attachment.html>
Hi Ariel,> As long as I know English the word "bit" is a "small pice", . Why in set of > documentation ir is "bytecode", in other set or llvm source is "bitecode"? > What is the right? Different people call the same thing such differently.it used to be called bytecode, now it is called bitcode, but not all documents were updated it seems. Ciao, Duncan.
Hi Ariel,> can you say what was the reason to rename bytecode? I am still interesting inyou forgot to send this to the mailing list, so I have (probably someone there knows better than I). I think the reason is that bitcode is bit-packed, i.e. you can have multiple pieces of information stored in one byte, so byte code was a misnomer. Ciao, Duncan.> > 2010/9/29 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr <mailto:baldrick at free.fr>> > > Hi Ariel, > > > As long as I know English the word "bit" is a "small pice", . Why in set of > > documentation ir is "bytecode", in other set or llvm source is "bitecode"? > > What is the right? Different people call the same thing such differently. > > it used to be called bytecode, now it is called bitcode, but not all > documents were updated it seems. > > Ciao, > > Duncan. > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu> http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > > > -- > best regards > Ariel
Anyone, can you say what was the reason to rename bytecode? I am still interesting in 2010/9/29 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> Hi Ariel,> As long as I know English the word "bit" is a "small pice", . Why in setof> documentation ir is "bytecode", in other set or llvm source is "bitecode"? > What is the right? Different people call the same thing such differently.it used to be called bytecode, now it is called bitcode, but not all documents were updated it seems. Ciao, Duncan. ______________________________> > _________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev-- best regards Ariel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100929/3cebf821/attachment.html>
Chris rewrote the original LLVM bytecode into it's present bitcode form. The newer code is much smaller than the previous form. That would be my guess for why he chose to call it bitcode. Of course, he can say for himself. :-) -bw On Sep 29, 2010, at 5:15 AM, Ariel Feinerman wrote:> Anyone, > > can you say what was the reason to rename bytecode? I am still interesting in > > 2010/9/29 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> > Hi Ariel, > > > As long as I know English the word "bit" is a "small pice", . Why in set of > > documentation ir is "bytecode", in other set or llvm source is "bitecode"? > > What is the right? Different people call the same thing such differently. > > it used to be called bytecode, now it is called bitcode, but not all > documents were updated it seems. > > Ciao, > > Duncan. > ______________________________ > _________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > -- > best regards > Ariel > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev