Hi Jon, Jon Harrop wrote:> Other people are creating far more bleeding edge VMs (e.g. VMKit) using LLVM's > GC API so they would be much better positioned to discuss the technical > aspects than I am. I would like to hear any status updates they have! > >VMKit uses conservative GCs (Boehm or Mmap2, a GC developed in our lab), so we don't use the GC API. But we are thinking on using it some day. Nicolas
On Thursday 19 February 2009 13:39:24 Nicolas Geoffray wrote:> Jon Harrop wrote: > > Other people are creating far more bleeding edge VMs (e.g. VMKit) using > > LLVM's GC API so they would be much better positioned to discuss the > > technical aspects than I am. I would like to hear any status updates they > > have! > > VMKit uses conservative GCs (Boehm or Mmap2, a GC developed in our lab), > so we don't use the GC API.Right.> But we are thinking on using it some day.I think it would be great if there were a simple working demo but I suppose the best such demo would be a minimal HLVM... What approach do you take to generics on the CLR? Also, are you gearing up for another release of VMKit to coincide with LLVM 2.5? -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
Jon Harrop wrote:> What approach do you take to generics on the CLR?I didn't implement the generics on the CLR port, but I think it instantiates a new LLVM method the first time the method is called. Then I think it's using caches to not instantiate multiple times the method with the same type.> Also, are you gearing up for > another release of VMKit to coincide with LLVM 2.5? > >Yes, soon to come, with many exciting new features! :) Nicolas