Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: LLVM 3.1 Has Been Quietly Postponed

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,366

    Default LLVM 3.1 Has Been Quietly Postponed

    Phoronix: LLVM 3.1 Has Been Quietly Postponed

    The major v3.1 update to the LLVM and Clang compiler components were quietly delayed last week. There's still no official communication on this setback for the Apple-sponsored compiler technology...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEwNDY

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,021

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    34

    Default

    That mailing list post is exceptionally unhelpful (not directed at ChrisXY, it *is* helpful for you to post the official response...) I would assume the real situation is there is a showstopper bug; giving a hard date then would be pointless since it'd simply ship when the bug is fixed. But it is Apple so who knows...?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    52

    Lightbulb

    Maybe they finally realized LLVM is a pointless endeavor and are trying to find a way to explain to the community that it's going to be dead.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    11

    Red face LLVM 3.1 Released

    Quote Originally Posted by blinxwang View Post
    Maybe they finally realized LLVM is a pointless endeavor and are trying to find a way to explain to the community that it's going to be dead.
    Sorry to crush your hope!

    http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/l...ay/000041.html

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hwertz View Post
    I would assume the real situation is there is a showstopper bug; giving a hard date then would be pointless since it'd simply ship when the bug is fixed. But it is Apple so who knows...?
    There has been a "final" svn tag for several days. I would assume that it was ready all along and they realized "maybe somebody should write some release notes and assemble all the changes we have made since 3.0"... and nobody did.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blinxwang View Post
    Maybe they finally realized LLVM is a pointless endeavor and are trying to find a way to explain to the community that it's going to be dead.
    But it's not pointless. It's used within mesa for shader programs and such, it's used for GPGPU purposes (compiling OpenCL or C or whatever into code to run on the GPU).

    Since both plain gcc, and LLVM, are really more a framework where various optimizations are developed, they should be able to feed off each other's successful strategies; as long as GCC and LLVM don't go stagnant, I really expect them to leapfrog each other in terms of speed. I saw a post a while back where someone reported LLVM 2.8 was faster than the earlier gcc 4.x version they were testing against, now LLVM 3.1 is slower than gcc-4.6.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •