News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Gollvm from Google by kibwen on Saturday May 27, 2017 @10:25PM (#14432861)
Wouldn't you have those same problems with an LLVM-based backend? LLVM moves very quickly, and AFAICT upgrades are non-trivial.
Re:Gollvm from Google by cyphar on Sunday May 28, 2017 @06:28AM (#14433808)
The problem wasn't the code generation, it's that it was maintained in a way that made it very difficult to update in distributions. They also broke the stdlib in a few versions. But even if you ignore all of that, if it was supported by upstream then we would have more fate in it than using a franken-compiler. ;)