I'm removing old targets that no longer appear actively maintained, to reduce the burden for target-independent codegen maintenance. Does anyone object to the removal of the Alpha backend? Dan
Hi Dan, Do you mind if I ask you what is the target-independent codegen maintenance? I imagine that target-independent codegen interface have to make with target-independent LLVM IR. I'm also interested in target-independent properties on LLVM. :) Thanks, Jin-Gu Kang ________________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Dan Gohman [gohman at apple.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 9:45 AM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Mailing List Subject: [LLVMdev] is anyone using the alpha backend? I'm removing old targets that no longer appear actively maintained, to reduce the burden for target-independent codegen maintenance. Does anyone object to the removal of the Alpha backend? Dan _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
On Oct 24, 2011, at 8:34 PM, Jin Gu Kang wrote:> Hi Dan, > > Do you mind if I ask you what is the target-independent > codegen maintenance? > > I imagine that target-independent codegen interface have to > make with target-independent LLVM IR. > > I'm also interested in target-independent properties on LLVM. :)"Target-independent CodeGen" is jargon for code shared between the various backends. Despite the name, this isn't directly related to target-independent properties of LLVM IR. Dan
Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com> writes:> I'm removing old targets that no longer appear actively maintained, > to reduce the burden for target-independent codegen maintenance. > > Does anyone object to the removal of the Alpha backend?It would be a shame to lose it. Alpha is an excellent example of a good RISC-style ISA. There's at least one simulator out there that uses it. What is the burden you are trying to reduce here? I don't think we should be throwing out targets for the sake of throwing them out. Having multiple targets is a good way to ensure the target independent stuff stays target independent. -Dave
On Oct 25, 2011, at 9:29 AM, David A. Greene wrote:> Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com> writes: > >> I'm removing old targets that no longer appear actively maintained, >> to reduce the burden for target-independent codegen maintenance. >> >> Does anyone object to the removal of the Alpha backend? > > It would be a shame to lose it. Alpha is an excellent example of a good > RISC-style ISA. There's at least one simulator out there that uses it.In this case, I disagree. The reality is that the Alpha target is not in as good of shape as (e.g.) the Sparc backend, there really is almost no hardware, and there are much better simulators for mips, sparc, arm, etc.> What is the burden you are trying to reduce here? I don't think we > should be throwing out targets for the sake of throwing them out. > Having multiple targets is a good way to ensure the target independent > stuff stays target independent.Having a target that isn't being used is just maintenance burden. -Chris