News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Gollvm from Google by wyldfire on Saturday May 27, 2017 @09:23PM (#14432697)
Go having its own intermediate representation "solves" the problem but requires go-specific backends/lowering mechanisms. LLVM is arguably a more generic place for backends to live. (though in practice it does serve clang's needs best).

If you design a new processor, you generally take it upon yourself to do the work necessary for folks to use C compilers that target your processors. I'd argue that they're more likely to contribute a backend implementation to LLVM than golang.

Re:Gollvm from Google by weberc2 on Saturday May 27, 2017 @10:14PM (#14432837)
I don't disagree, but that's a different problem than the one discussed above. :)