Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
If clang/LLVM was finished, would you support Gentoo's move?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Would you support a Gentoo move to clang/LLVM
Yes
79%
 79%  [ 155 ]
No
20%
 20%  [ 40 ]
Total Votes : 195

Author Message
yzg
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 197

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
Bill Cosby
Guru
Guru


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Posts: 430
Location: Aachen, Germany

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What is more important is to replace the sucking glibc, but if it is about replacing GNU I always vote yes :P

p.s.: as a side note, I was kinda shocked that one of Gentoo's GSoC ideas is to port GNU shit to BSD 8O
_________________
The Creature from Jekyll Island.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John R. Graham
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 7746
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
_________________
This space intentionally left blank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John R. Graham wrote:
Probably from you. :P
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
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John R. Graham
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 7746
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
_________________
This space intentionally left blank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John R. Graham
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 7746
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
_________________
This space intentionally left blank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
djdunn
l33t
l33t


Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 689
Location: Arrakis

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the present."

-Master Oogway
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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?
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
avx
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 2070

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
avx
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 2070

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know, I just mentioned it because of the "freedom of choice"-thingy and the "too much work"-guys ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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)
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
avx
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 2070

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
platojones
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Oct 2002
Posts: 1554
Location: Just over the horizon

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pigeon768
l33t
l33t


Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 669

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
My political bias.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
avx
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 2070

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message
mdeininger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1740
Location: Emerald Isles, overlooking Dublin's docklands

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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 :D. 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
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John R. Graham
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 7746
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, think of how much money people would save. :P

- John
_________________
This space intentionally left blank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3327

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John R. Graham wrote:
Yeah, think of how much money people would save. :P

- John
lol. Anything to get rid of Stallman. He's gone from visionary to joke
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi

Cold is gods way to tell us to burn more Catholics
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 3 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum