News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Jank development update – Moving to LLVM IR by michielderhaeg on Thursday October 17, 2024 @03:45AM (#41867338)
Absolutely not. They do invasive changes all the time. At work we maintain an LLVM compatibility library that provides a stable interface across different LLVM versions. It has grown quite big over the years. The pure C interface is in comparison much more stable, but also quite limited.

Not just the API changes, the LLVM IR syntax can change drastically as well. E.g. not too long ago they switched from types pointer types to opaque pointers. `i32*` just becomes `ptr`. [1]

[1] https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html

Re:Jank development update – Moving to LLVM IR by fooker on Thursday October 17, 2024 @04:20AM (#41867508)
IR can be auto-upgraded between LLVM versions.
Re:Jank development update – Moving to LLVM IR by almostgotcaught on Thursday October 17, 2024 @07:05AM (#41868402)
citation? i work on LLVM (like llvm/llvm-project) and i'm not aware of such a tool.
Re:Jank development update – Moving to LLVM IR by theresistor on Thursday October 17, 2024 @07:42AM (#41868681)
The textual IR is not backwards compatible, but the bitcode format has been best-effort auto-upgradeable for as long as I've been involved (2006). The policy is documented here: https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#ir-backwards-comp...
Re:Jank development update – Moving to LLVM IR by almostgotcaught on Thursday October 17, 2024 @08:23AM (#41868980)
bitcode policy i'm aware of - it's the "IR" part that caught my attention.
Re:Jank development update – Moving to LLVM IR by mannycalavera42 on Thursday October 17, 2024 @08:47AM (#41869160)
a pretty evident case of not almost got caught