Re: [FYI] LLVM: function prefix data (a.k.a. tables-next-to-code) committed

We should make sure that someone that understands this issue talks to them ASAP. On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Carter Schonwald < carter.schonwald@gmail.com> wrote:

yup! its exciting.

we were talking about this a bit earlier today on #haskell-llvm, and it sounds doable. There were some concerns that folks had, but hopefully we can give the llvm devs feedback about this before its finalized in LLVM 3.4 so it doesn't come with any performance caveats for ghc.

On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Gabor Greif wrote:

...

This looks pretty exiting for LLVM IR-generation:

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130909/188042....

GHC 7.10 might generate LLVM IR including embedded tables without resorting to linker tricks/postprocessing when targeting LLVM 3.4!

The relevant LLVM bug is http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14080

and GHC Trac: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4213

Cheers,

Gabor _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs