search for: modulecompil

...VM, not removing any > existing JIT functionality. I was actually going to make something orthogonal to the JIT. It would not support nearly as much functionality as the JIT (though it would have similar code). Here is a very loose use case - does this seem reasonable? **** #include modulecompiler #include module_loader char * countdown_function = "int %countdown (int %AnArg) {\n" " %result = call fastcc int %foo-int (int %AnArg) \n" " ret int %result\n" "}\n" "fastcc int %foo-int (int %AnArg) {\n" "EntryB...

Alexander, Yes, a patch like that would be accepted. Fewer dependencies = good :) Some notes on doing this: (1) Please make sure you use the std c++ iostream libraries for doing I/O. No native calls (we end up with portability problems). If you need something that must be ported, please add it to lib/System (2) You should also use the sys::Path class (include/llvm/System/Path.h) for handling

On May 16, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 16 May 2005, Alexander Friedman wrote: > > Would it be possible (ie, relatively straitforward) to do the > > following: Take the code in module A, compile it with the JIT (since > > we cannot make libraries in Windows), and save the resulting binary > > goo in some file. Later (in a different instance of the runtime), with >

...e JIT. It would > not support nearly as much functionality as the JIT (though it would > have similar code). Actually, that's even better as its a completely separate thing. > > Here is a very loose use case - does this seem reasonable? > > **** > > #include modulecompiler > > #include module_loader > > char * countdown_function = > "int %countdown (int %AnArg) {\n" > " %result = call fastcc int %foo-int (int %AnArg) \n" > " ret int %result\n" > "}\n" > "fastcc int %fo...