diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-06-20-.NET-Differences.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-06-20-.NET-Differences.txt | 30 |
1 files changed, 30 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-06-20-.NET-Differences.txt b/docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-06-20-.NET-Differences.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..1bc2eae746 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/HistoricalNotes/2001-06-20-.NET-Differences.txt @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 12:32:22 -0500 +From: Vikram Adve <vadve@cs.uiuc.edu> +To: Chris Lattner <lattner@cs.uiuc.edu> +Subject: .NET vs. our VM + +One significant difference between .NET CLR and our VM is that the CLR +includes full information about classes and inheritance. In fact, I just +sat through the paper on adding templates to .NET CLR, and the speaker +indicated that the goal seems to be to do simple static compilation (very +little lowering or optimization). Also, the templates implementation in CLR +"relies on dynamic class loading and JIT compilation". + +This is an important difference because I think there are some significant +advantages to have a much lower level VM layer, and do significant static +analysis and optimization. + +I also talked to the lead guy for KAI's C++ compiler (Arch Robison) and he +said that SGI and other commercial compilers have included options to export +their *IR* next to the object code (i.e., .il files) and use them for +link-time code generation. In fact, he said that the .o file was nearly +empty and was entirely generated from the .il at link-time. But he agreed +that this limited the link-time interprocedural optimization to modules +compiled by the same compiler, whereas our approach allows us to link and +optimize modules from multiple different compilers. (Also, of course, they +don't do anything for runtime optimization). + +All issues to bring up in Related Work. + +--Vikram + |