search for: monomorphised

Hi all, I'm in a very preliminary phase of a language project which requires some specific optimizations to be reasonably efficient. LLVM already looks very good; I'd just like to know whether I can push these optimizations through LLVM to the JIT phase (which, as far as I understand the docs, is a pretty powerful part of LLVM). The optimizations that I need to get to work are: *

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 07:14:28PM -0800, Sean Silva via llvm-dev wrote: > Can you show a real benchmark that users have tried to write where the call > overhead of actually using an external function call is measurable? This is the wrong question. The correct question is: What useful benchmark cannot trivally factor out the overhead of the external function call. Yes, if you do

Hi Jo, On 2007-12-24, at 14:43, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > I'm in a very preliminary phase of a language project which requires > some specific optimizations to be reasonably efficient. > > LLVM already looks very good; I'd just like to know whether I can > push these optimizations through LLVM to the JIT phase (which, as > far as I understand the docs, is a

The memory consumed by the code compiled is huge in server applications. And it is not shared by different virtual machine instances. By contrast, shared libraries are memory mapped, therefore they are shared between different instances of the executables using them. It is posible to throw away code after using it, but then compilation cost would be repeated. And dynamic compilation prevents

Ramón García wrote: > I would prefer to see actual code to make safe schedules. With code I can see > what changes one must make. I can also show in detail these changes, > which would give security to the LLVM project that the proposal is > viable. By contrast, > without code, neither me nor LLVM project can ensure that the project will > be successfully performed behind

...tly leaves such knowledge to LLVM. > > Good idea, but the needed logistics would make it ugly. > > - Mark test::black_box as noinline > > Also not ideal because of the mandatory function call overhead. > > - External function > > Impossible for Rust; generics are monomorphised into the crate in which it > is used (ie the resulting function in IR won’t ever be external to the > module using it), thus making this an impossible solution for Rust. Also, > Rust doesn’t allow function overloading, so C++ style explicit > specialization is also out. Also suffers fro...