On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 6:32 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> This is very much a proof-of-concept/work-in-progress at this stage, but
> attached is a patch to GCC which aims to provide an embeddable
> JIT-compilation API, using GCC as the backend: libgccjit.so.
>
> This shared library can then be dynami
On Fri, 2013-10-04 at 15:00 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > Right now all you get back from the result is a "void*" which you're
> > meant to cast to machine code for the CPU. I guess we could add an
>
> And right now the library is calling dlopen.
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 21:32 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
[...]
> * I'm running into configure/Makefile issues with
> --enable-host-shared, where CFLAGS contains -fPIC, but only on
> invocations of leaf Makefiles, not on recursive "make" - so it works if
> you cd into $builddir/gcc and make (and so
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, David Malcolm wrote:
> Right now all you get back from the result is a "void*" which you're
> meant to cast to machine code for the CPU. I guess we could add an
And right now the library is calling dlopen. Which means that although
what the user gets is a void *, the dynam
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 21:32 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
[...]
> Shall I get this into a "jit" branch? I greatly prefer git to svn, so
> I'd probably do:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GitMirror#Git-only_branches
> assuming that this allows a sane path to (I hope) eventual merger.
I've gone ahead and
On Thu, 2013-10-03 at 21:42 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Oct 2013, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > The idea is that GCC is configured with a special --enable-host-shared
> > option, which leads to it being built as position-independent code. You
> > would configure it with host==target, gi
On Wed, 2 Oct 2013, David Malcolm wrote:
> The idea is that GCC is configured with a special --enable-host-shared
> option, which leads to it being built as position-independent code. You
> would configure it with host==target, given that the generated machine
> code will be executed within the sa
On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 21:32 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
[...]
> FWIW I
> also have the beginnings of Python bindings for the library (doing the
> interface as pure C makes language-bindings easier), though that would
> probably live in a separate repository (so not part of this patch).
I've clea
On Oct 2, 2013, at 6:32 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> This is very much a proof-of-concept/work-in-progress at this stage, but
> attached is a patch to GCC which aims to provide an embeddable
> JIT-compilation API
> Thoughts?
Neat.
