Hoopl vs LLVM?
garious at gmail.com
Tue Dec 11 23:07:57 CET 2012
Thank you all for your replies.
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
<simonpj at microsoft.com>wrote:
> And I think there is probably quite a lot that is in reach for C--, but
> out of reach for LLVM. Why? Because before we pass the code to LLVM we do
Is there a case for making a C/C++ compiler target C-- instead of LLVM? Or
does its optimizations cater more to functional programming or lazy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users