search for: __spawn

2009/3/30 someguy <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com<just.s0m3.guy%2Bllvmdev at gmail.com> > > Can you not achieve the same effect without adding intrinsics? Insert > function calls to a __spawn and __join pseudo-function instead? > It would make LLVM code generation more difficult because instead of building a new instruction (in this case intrinsic) you will be building complex function calls and therefore making much more changes to the existing front-end of your existing language if...

...owever, some of the issues that concern you might not be as bad as you think. On Mar 30, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Milos Puzovic wrote: > 2009/3/30 someguy <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com> > Can you not achieve the same effect without adding intrinsics? > Insert function calls to a __spawn and __join pseudo-function instead? > It would make LLVM code generation more difficult because instead of > building a new instruction (in this case intrinsic) you will be > building complex function calls and therefore making much more > changes to the existing front-end of your...

Can you not achieve the same effect without adding intrinsics? Insert function calls to a __spawn and __join pseudo-function instead? 2009/3/30 Milos Puzovic <milos.puzovic at gmail.com> > Hi Nicolas, > > 2009/3/30 Nicolas Geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at lip6.fr> > >> Can you be more verbose on this? Are you planning to implement some JVM >> or .Net extension...

Hi Nicolas, 2009/3/30 Nicolas Geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at lip6.fr> > Can you be more verbose on this? Are you planning to implement some JVM > or .Net extension for supporting your new intrinsics? Or are you just > looking for a runtime with a GC? At the moment I am not looking to add any new extensions to JVM or .NET. I would need a runtime with a GC to demonstrate and test

...ome kind? 2009/3/30 Milos Puzovic <milos.puzovic at gmail.com> > 2009/3/30 someguy <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com<just.s0m3.guy%2Bllvmdev at gmail.com> > > > >> Can you not achieve the same effect without adding intrinsics? Insert >> function calls to a __spawn and __join pseudo-function instead? >> > It would make LLVM code generation more difficult because instead of > building a new instruction (in this case intrinsic) you will be building > complex function calls and therefore making much more changes to the > existing front-end of y...

...edu> > Is the user expected to add the calls to spawn/join or the compiler? If > it's the compiler adding them, then you don't need to change the front-end > at all, you can do all that in an optimization pass. If it's the user > adding them, then adding calls to "__spawn()" that the compiler will > intercept and change into "pthread_create" or whatever, doesn't require > changing the front-end either. > At the moment I am interested to languages where parallelism is explicit and the way how language developers want to express that parall...

...Is the user expected to add the calls to spawn/join or the > compiler? If it's the compiler adding them, then you don't need to > change the front-end at all, you can do all that in an optimization > pass. If it's the user adding them, then adding calls to > "__spawn()" that the compiler will intercept and change into > "pthread_create" or whatever, doesn't require changing the front-end > either. > At the moment I am interested to languages where parallelism is > explicit and the way how language developers want to express...