View previous topic :: View next topic |
Would you support a Gentoo move to clang/LLVM |
Yes |
|
78% |
[ 157 ] |
No |
|
21% |
[ 43 ] |
|
Total Votes : 200 |
|
Author |
Message |
yzg Guru
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Posts: 493
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apple/BSD is there if someone wants to use it. Copying the same to Gentoo will be a reduction in the available options. I selected Gentoo because it is fast and highly customizable. We do not write all our applications in Java. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bill Cosby Guru
Joined: 22 Jan 2005 Posts: 430 Location: Aachen, Germany
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What is more important is to replace the sucking glibc, but if it is about replacing GNU I always vote yes
p.s.: as a side note, I was kinda shocked that one of Gentoo's GSoC ideas is to port GNU shit to BSD _________________ The Creature from Jekyll Island. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yzg wrote: | Apple/BSD is there if someone wants to use it. Copying the same to Gentoo will be a reduction in the available options. I selected Gentoo because it is fast and highly customizable. We do not write all our applications in Java. | wtf? Where did you get that from. _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10590 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cokehabit wrote: | people are still stuck in 1998, java isn't slow anymore. And virtual machines, with the big increases in power and speed of computers, will make more and more sense soon. | I don't believe it's slow in an absolute sense; instead, I believe it's slower, in a relative sense, and, given an equal quality implementation, will always be slower. Choose any nontrivial benchmark you want: my contention is that a GCC-compiled implementation will outperform a Java (or LLVM-based) implementation.
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John R. Graham wrote: | Probably from you.
cokehabit wrote: | people are still stuck in 1998, java isn't slow anymore. And virtual machines, with the big increases in power and speed of computers, will make more and more sense soon. | I don't believe it's slow in an absolute sense; instead, I believe it's slower, in a relative sense, and, given an equal quality implementation, will always be slower. Choose any nontrivial benchmark you want: my contention is that a GCC-compiled implementation will outperform a Java (or LLVM-based) implementation.
- John | LLVM is hardly like the JVM _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10590 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I'm going to stop talking as I don't have a deep conceptual understanding of LLVM. One parting shot, though. I contend that the net effect on the quality of generated code of introducing an additional layer of abstraction between the programmer's intent (the source code) and the iron can be no better than zero and is almost certainly negative. Clang and LLVM appear to have interesting--laudable, even--goals, but generating the absolute best machine code doesn't seem to be one of them.
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Shining Arcanine Veteran
Joined: 24 Sep 2009 Posts: 1110
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John R. Graham wrote: | You all really should look at what LLVM really is. Gentoo on an interpreter? Eeww. I vote, "Heck no."
- John |
An interpreter is a small portion of LLVM. If Gentoo replaced GCC with LLVM, it would not be using the interpreter feature.
John R. Graham wrote: | Well, I'm going to stop talking as I don't have a deep conceptual understanding of LLVM. One parting shot, though. I contend that the net effect on the quality of generated code of introducing an additional layer of abstraction between the programmer's intent (the source code) and the iron can be no better than zero and is almost certainly negative. Clang and LLVM appear to have interesting--laudable, even--goals, but generating the absolute best machine code doesn't seem to be one of them.
- John |
Do you realize that GCC already does this with GIMPLE? LLVM is the same thing, except designed in a more rigorous manner. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John R. Graham wrote: | Well, I'm going to stop talking as I don't have a deep conceptual understanding of LLVM. One parting shot, though. I contend that the net effect on the quality of generated code of introducing an additional layer of abstraction between the programmer's intent (the source code) and the iron can be no better than zero and is almost certainly negative. Clang and LLVM appear to have interesting--laudable, even--goals, but generating the absolute best machine code doesn't seem to be one of them.
- John | i agree but in business quality of code isn't always paramount. _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10590 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shining Arcanine wrote: | Do you realize that GCC already does this with GIMPLE? LLVM is the same thing, except designed in a more rigorous manner. | Not the same thing. An "intermediate representation" is not the same thing as virtual machine byte code. An intermediate representation can carry all sorts of extra metadata to help the code generator back end.
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
djdunn l33t
Joined: 26 Dec 2004 Posts: 810
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First of all I think that because of our one fundamental rule of Gentoo, that of choice, that the possibility to replace GCC should be a viable option. However I'm sure we all agree that it would take a monumental amount of work and quality testing.
Now to the question itself, I believe that if proven to work and be more efficient that I would support the replacement of GCC as the default, but only if it is proven to be an acceptable and viable replacement. _________________ “Music is a moral law. It gives a soul to the Universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination, a charm to sadness, gaiety and life to everything. It is the essence of order, and leads to all that is good and just and beautiful.”
― Plato |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
djdunn wrote: | First of all I think that because of our one fundamental rule of Gentoo, that of choice, that the possibility to replace GCC should be a viable option. However I'm sure we all agree that it would take a monumental amount of work and quality testing.
Now to the question itself, I believe that if proven to work and be more efficient that I would support the replacement of GCC as the default, but only if it is proven to be an acceptable and viable replacement. | And that would take time.
Maybe the question should be whether people should be implementing it now for the future? _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
avx Advocate
Joined: 21 Jun 2004 Posts: 2152
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd love to kick out gcc, I'm actually quite happy with ICC (for what it compiles, that is) and since LLVM seems promising, I'd go for it.
On the other hand, I don't think that'll ever happen on Gentoo. I remember, how I requested to drop BASH about three years ago and the answers only been "no want do, to much work". |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
avx wrote: | I'd love to kick out gcc, I'm actually quite happy with ICC (for what it compiles, that is) and since LLVM seems promising, I'd go for it.
On the other hand, I don't think that'll ever happen on Gentoo. I remember, how I requested to drop BASH about three years ago and the answers only been "no want do, to much work". | no-one really wants to drob bash though. There are benefits to moving to zsh but I dont think as many as moving something as big and as unweildly like GCC _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
avx Advocate
Joined: 21 Jun 2004 Posts: 2152
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I know, I just mentioned it because of the "freedom of choice"-thingy and the "too much work"-guys |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
avx wrote: | I know, I just mentioned it because of the "freedom of choice"-thingy and the "too much work"-guys | you know what i'd love, that's to create Gentoo 2.0 with zsh, ICC, uClibc and a host of other technologies that aren't used in gentoo (yet) _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
avx Advocate
Joined: 21 Jun 2004 Posts: 2152
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We could be a good step forward on that, if the kernel wouldn't be coded so gcc-specific. I appreciate the work the LinuxDNA-guys are doing, to get it to compile against ICC, but they shouldn't even have this problem in the first place.
Personally, I don't like uclibc and am more a dietlibc-guy, but well, if we could make it exchangable, everybody could be made happy.
For the other stuff not yet introduced, it's about time @mdeiniger get's his ass up for a sponsorship, dev9 f.e. is really nice.
And while we're at it, get rid of the clutter that is X11, thank you :p |
|
Back to top |
|
|
platojones Veteran
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 Posts: 1602 Location: Just over the horizon
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's an interesting idea. Clang and LLVM are in portage now. Way too early to move Gentoo toward such a fundamental toochain change, but I don't think there would be much love lost with the GCC toolchain, so an alternative is definitely worth looking at.
Anyway, I think I'll emerge them and see what they do. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
would there be any gentoo users willing to put it into practice?
I would certainly have no problems trying to do it.
What would be really good is if someone make a bootstrappable ICC gentoo stage 1 cd so everything downto the bare bones was constructed from it.
Then create stage 3 and 4 cds for those who are curious and then try to make it an official project _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pigeon768 l33t
Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 683
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wswartzendruber wrote: | It's already faster than GCC? After all these years? | gcc produces faster binaries than clang last I checked. (~5 months ago) Some 10% faster. clang compiles lightening fast compared to gcc.
Also, C++ support in clang is terrible. We'll still need gcc around for years to come.
That being said, I'd love to give it a shot, especially on my eeepc. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
right pigeon, you get on adding C++ support, i'll get mdeininger some sponsorship so he can finish dev9. I'll see if we can get brian harring to make sure pkgcore works flawlessly on it and maybe put aliases in so both emerge and pmerge work and avx can sort out dietlibc _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
avx Advocate
Joined: 21 Jun 2004 Posts: 2152
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is there a list containing (all) packages from portage, which fail to build/run without anything but gcc/glibc? A few are named in the ICC-article on the wiki, but I doubt that's all of 'em. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mdeininger Veteran
Joined: 15 Jun 2005 Posts: 1740 Location: Emerald Isles, observing Dublin's docklands
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yeah, it's a bit of a bitch developing stuff as side-projects, especially when you have too many of 'em. but thanks for reminding me, i think i'll go hack a bit on stuff tonight and maybe see if dev9 works well now . iirc theres been a good batch o kernel patches to v9fs, and i'd hate to have to port it to fuse or stuff. _________________ "Confident, lazy, cocky, dead." -- Felix Jongleur, Otherland
( Twitter | Blog | GitHub ) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
heh, Gentoo2 or Gentootoo
It would be good though. Who has the most to gain from something like this? Intel I suppose? They could take a hige gulp of the compiler market if it could be shown that ICC works as well or better than GCC _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10590 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, think of how much money people would save.
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cokey Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004 Posts: 3355
|
Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John R. Graham wrote: | Yeah, think of how much money people would save.
- John | lol. Anything to get rid of Stallman. He's gone from visionary to joke _________________ https://otw20.com/ OTW20 The new place for off the wall chat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|