Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Chris Townley <news@cct-net.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: ISO: The Eiffel OO programming language and IDE, on VMS
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 18:44:53 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <vs9f37$19tu2$1@dont-email.me>
References: <j7jutjdo007jkfp956ofp846ecb0nfpr32@4ax.com>
 <vrnmla$155vg$1@dont-email.me> <vrvbb2$arv9$1@dont-email.me>
 <87v7rwjs3e.fsf@lucy.meyer21c.net> <vs0qdf$1mlt9$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs47iu$sgia$1@dont-email.me> <vs487f$trca$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs6sgr$3bt6n$3@dont-email.me> <vs9djd$nov4$1@paganini.bofh.team>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 19:44:55 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cacca5882675a704057f26ecdf44bd47";
	logging-data="1374146"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/e8UEXq44yEIpBTGjGJCKce/eNfrCXN/Q="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xwdKQvx4UEespXPL83IWryIUO9U=
In-Reply-To: <vs9djd$nov4$1@paganini.bofh.team>
Content-Language: en-GB

On 29/03/2025 18:19, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-earth.ufp> wrote:
>> On 2025-03-27, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>
>>> or:
>>> - people use a different backend than LLVM (GCC, custom, whatever)
>>>
>>
>> If anyone knows of a serious backend code generator other than LLVM
>> or GCC, please feel free to point me at it. :-)
>>
>> Simon.
>>
>> PS: And no Bill, the Amsterdam Compiler Kit does not apply. :-)
> 
> Depends what you consider serious (and what "backend" means).
> There is bunch of compilers that use their own backend,
> for example optimized Ocaml or SBCL Lisp.  If you aim at
> highest possible speed, regardless of language, then they
> can not compete.  If you look at native performance for
> relevant languages, then they are top performers (there are
> Lisp compilers which generate code via translation to C,
> resulting speed is lower than obtained using SBCL).
> 
> Note that context was porting languages, "classic"
> languages are covered by VSI, so relevant things are
> backends for more exotic languages.  There was recent
> trend to adopt LLVM in such cases, and Julia seem to
> be prominent example of language dependent on LLVM.
> But more popular approach seem to be via custom
> backend or via C.  For example Haskell folks some time
> ago said that LLVM does not really give them advantages
> compared to going via C, and C way is easier.
> 

Isn't that what GNAT does for Ada?

-- 
Chris