Hello Jonathan,

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> wrote:
> If that is the case, then why would one consider using C--?
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 6:22 AM, Sandro Magi <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>
>> My mistake. They're planning to move away from the gcc backend, and I
>> thought I had read C-- would eventually go away given it's not really
>> being actively developed anymore, but I can't seem to find where I got
>> that idea. I'd wager their C-- support will depend on how well LLVM
>> adapts to support their needs in the near future, since maintaining
>> native backends is a lot of work.
>>
>> Sandro
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitc-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
>
>

As far as I can tell from my discussions with the Simons (Simon
Peyton-Jones and Simon Marlow), the GHC mailing list, and the wiki
pages: C-- for the Native Code Generator (NCG) backend is the plan.
The LLVM backend is new and interesting work, but I don't think there
has been any movement / discussions to rely strictly on LLVM and stop
supporting NCG backend.

Thanks.
--
Donnie
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev

Reply via email to