Am 04.03.2013 01:24, schrieb Dimitri Smits: > > > ----- Oorspronkelijk e-mail ----- >> Van: "Florian Klämpfl" <flor...@freepascal.org> Aan: "FPC-Pascal >> users discussions" <fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org> Verzonden: >> Vrijdag 1 maart 2013 18:13:42 Onderwerp: Re: [fpc-pascal] Object >> pascal language compatiblity - was: Does FPC 2.8.0 can actually >> still be called Pascal ? >> >> Am 01.03.2013 11:04, schrieb Sven Barth: >>> >>> But even if LLVM would support all targets that FPC supports the >>> core developers don't *want* to make LLVM the default. >> >> Actually, I wouldn't have any interest working on a compiler using >> llvm as a backend because it leaves only the boring front end work >> :) Not to mention the maintainance problems when depending on an >> external cg written not in pascal, the probably significant speed >> drop etc. >> > > as a matter of fact, the llvm-stack is not just your front-end to > provide the intermediate bytecode (or textual variant)! You can > provide/maintain multiple plugins for almost every "pass". Going from > optimisation passes to the entire "executable generation" as > back-end. Admittedly you need to make a C(++?) compatible interface, > but I think nobody stops you from making those passes/plugins in > FPC...
And how does this change the fact that it is an external cg not written in pascal? _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
