On 2018-01-31 14:42:26 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> I'm just starting to look at this (amazing) work, and I don't have a
> strong opinion yet. But certainly, making it easy for packagers to
> put the -jit stuff into a separate package for the reasons already
> given sounds sensible to me. Some systems package LLVM as one
> gigantic package that'll get you 1GB of compiler/debugger/other stuff
> and perhaps violate local rules by installing a compiler when you
> really just wanted libLLVM{whatever}.so. I guess it should be made
> very clear to users (explain plans, maybe startup message, ...?)
I'm not quite sure I understand. You mean have it display whether
available? I think my plan is to "just" set jit_expressions=on (or
whatever we're going to name it) fail if the prerequisites aren't
available. I personally don't think this should be enabled by default,
definitely not in the first release.
> $ c++ -v
> FreeBSD clang version 4.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_400/final 297347) (based on
> LLVM 4.0.0)
>
> This seems to be a valid complaint. I don't think you should be
> (indirectly) wrapping Types.h in extern "C". At a guess, your
> llvmjit.h should be doing its own #ifdef __cplusplus'd linkage
> specifiers, so you can use it from C or C++, but making sure that you
> don't #include LLVM's headers from a bizarro context where __cplusplus
> is defined but the linkage is unexpectedly already "C"?
Hm, this seems like a bit of pointless nitpickery by the compiler to me,
but I guess...
Greetings,
Andres Freund