[pypy-dev] Next step: gen???.py

holger krekel hpk at trillke.net
Wed Mar 30 19:48:43 CEST 2005

Hi Armin, hi all, 

thanks for the good post and listing of choice of options! 
Let me add a some quick thoughts and comments. 

On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 18:25 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote:
> * Enhance genc.py using the C++ facility of function overloading for
> simplicity (basically, we would generate "z=add(x,y)" in the file and let the
> C++ compiler decide which version of add() to call based on the declared types
> of x and y).  This might well be the easiest solution.  A minor drawback is to
> require a C++ compiler.  A possibly larger drawback is that the C++
> compilation time might be quite larger, even for similar-looking code.  
> (Having to know C++ in the first place shouldn't be that big a drawback if we
> don't use fancy C++ features.)
> ... 
> Then to pick one of the first two options, the second one (allowing some C++
> facilities to sneak it) is my favourite.

Wouldn't this mean that we are barred from using "tcc" for
testing/debugging purposes? 

To me the current No. 1 criterium for the choice of backends is 
development-testing/round-trip speed.  And i would guess that both 
LLVM and genc both fare better than C++ in that respect. 

Also, it would be interesting to hear from Carl what the current
state of the LLVM backend is (all tests pass for me, btw, and
Carl seems to have made quite some progress judging from 
the passing tests and the generated .ll files alone). 



More information about the Pypy-dev mailing list