[pypy-dev] Experiments with PyPy and libgccjit

[Maciej Fijalkowski]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Ryan Gonzalez <rymg19 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 6:35 AM, Ryan <rymg19 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> I don't know; it just seems weird, since LLVM and libgccjit seem to
>> >> hold
>> >> similar concepts (though there's a 99% chance I'm wrong; I just glanced
>> >> over
>> >> the libgccjit description).
>> >>
>> >> What I *really* wish PyPy could have would be a C-- backend. *That*
>> >> would be
>> >> insanely awesome and would probably blow the C backend out of the
>> >> water.
>> >
>> > You seem to have a lot of opinions. Can you back this one up with
>> > something?
>
>
> I like to experiment with stuff that probably won't work. Can't help it.
>
>>
>>
>> To clarify my question:
>>
>> C-- looks like a cool idea, but not very actively developed. I would
>> expect to run into bugs or just missing features.  Some parts are
>> obviously more suited for compilers than say C, but I would expect GCC
>> (and to some extent LLVM) to be more mature and have better
>> optimizations. I would need to see some evidence of C-- being used by
>> someone else than original author before trying to evaluate it.
>>
>
> Which is why I said *I wish*. It probably won't happen because Quick C--
> (the only C-- compiler) has been abandoned. I think C-- would be great
> because it has an awesome runtime interface. You can traverse the stack,
> gather roots, mark specific variables as roots and others as non-roots...all
> built-in.

Yes, I like the idea too :-) but getting from an idea to a working
implementation gives a lot of headaches and the implementation might
happen to be not as cool as the idea.