Dynamic libraries by default and GHC 7.8

Brandon Allbery allbery.b at gmail.com
Thu Dec 6 22:35:42 CET 2012

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 05/12/12 15:17, Brandon Allbery wrote:
>> Probably none; on most platforms you're actually generating different
>> code (dynamic libraries require generation of position-independent
> Sure there's a lot of differences in the generated code, but inside GHC
> these differences only appear at the very last stage of the pipeline,
> native code generation (or LLVM).  All the stages up to that can be shared,
> which accounts for roughly 80% of compilation time (IIRC).

I was assuming it would be difficult to separate those stages of the
internal compilation pipeline out, given previous discussions of how said
pipeline works.  (In particular I was under the impression saving/restoring
state in the pipeline to rerun the final phase with multiple code
generators was not really possible, and multithreading them concurrently
even less so.)

brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
allbery.b at gmail.com                                  ballbery at sinenomine.net
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20121206/fbb9404f/attachment.htm>

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list