Yes, some modifications to LLVM were needed. Fortunately, those LLVM patches were committed to mainline LLVM yesterday:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/cvs-ghc/2010-March/052909.html Sandro On 11/03/2010 11:51 AM, Aleksi Nurmi wrote: > I found some interesting pages from the GHC wiki: > - The LLVM backend actually uses a modified version of LLVM. [1] > - Their new codegen still uses Cmm.[2] I guess that Cmm is considered > a somewhat stable intermediate language due to the number of backends > they have. > > [1] > http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Commentary/Compiler/Backends/LLVM/Issues > > [2] > http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Commentary/Compiler/NewCodeGenPipeline > > Now that I think of it, is there a compelling reason not to use GHC > for native code compilation? It is stable and in active development. > They have a high-end garbage collector tuned for functional programs > and a C backend. Many recent languages such as Agda actually target > Haskell. GHC is big, but it's good and implemented in a safe language. > _______________________________________________ > bitc-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
