From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.157.26.119 with SMTP id u52mr5948731otu.101.1477057625289; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 06:47:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.157.35.87 with SMTP id k23mr835446otd.13.1477057625256; Fri, 21 Oct 2016 06:47:05 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!e187no1434984itc.0!news-out.google.com!w143ni546itb.0!nntp.google.com!e187no1434973itc.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 06:47:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=80.189.231.177; posting-account=-ji9FwoAAAClRIG9opIA0eWufPHPN-Nu NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.189.231.177 References: <7eaadf74-c55f-4c00-8f13-bf027cce130e@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <36f46056-6126-4c0b-8955-9408e05d0708@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: LLVM and Ada From: jparkerg000@gmail.com Injection-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 13:47:05 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:32154 Date: 2016-10-21T06:47:04-07:00 List-Id: On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 9:32:04 AM UTC+1, vincent....@gmail.com wrot= e: > Le jeudi 20 octobre 2016 20:20:44 UTC+2, Simon Clubley a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0= : >=20 > > There is no viable Ada frontend for current versions of LLVM (AFAIK) > > although various people have looked at this. >=20 > Thank you Simon for your answer.=20 >=20 > Why Gnat on LLVM has been abandoned ? Was LLVM less appropriate than GCC = for GNAT=C2=A0? >=20 > My question precisely was not about the Ada frontend in fact but about a = binding to use the LLVM from an Ada program that is a sort of compiler. I t= hink that those who ported GNAT to LLVM=C2=A0should have created this kind = of binding, no ? >=20 > Kind regards, >=20 > Vincent The author of the GNAT LLVM compiler posted a few remarks on the subject in= 2014. A search of comp.lang.ada should pull up the thread easily enough. I= 'll cut and paste the text for you. J. duncan...@deepbluecap.com =09 10/17/14 Hi, > > That was the DragonEgg project, wasn't it? I got the impression it > > > foundered on some shortcoming of LLVM for non-C languages; not certain > > > which, but possibly the one regarding nested functions that Tristan has > > > overcome with ghdl. no, there were no blocking technical problems. For example I got nested fu= nction support working properly a gazillion years ago, as Luke says. Excep= tion handling took longer to be completely reliable, but that was also reso= lved years ago too. In both cases changes needed to be made to LLVM, but t= hose changes are all old hat now. All that happened is that I lost interes= t in the project and no-one stepped forward to take it over. That means th= at it's been quietly bit rotting for a while now. For example: to accommod= ate internal changes in gcc-4.7 and later, dragonegg's ABI support needs to= be rewritten, but I'd already lost interest in the project so never did it= , which means that while it still mostly sorta works, thanks to some hacks,= the plugin easily crashes on Ada tagged types starting from this gcc versi= on. Ciao, Duncan.=20