
Writing Fibonacci in LLVM with llvmlite - ingve
https://ian-bertolacci.github.io/llvm/llvmlite/python/compilers/programming/2016/03/06/LLVMLite_fibonacci.html
======
zamalek
> Have you ever built LLVM from source? If you want to hate yourself and your
> for a few hours try that sucker out.

I really have to hand it to the LLVM team, getting LLVM to build on Windows
was _absolutely nothing_ more than a matter of installing CMake and running
it. It's usually far easier to build from source on Linux.

The documentation on the other hand...

~~~
vmorgulis
I think he is talking of hours of compiling.

As you say, LLVM build system works well. I use it indirectly thru emscripten.

Prebuilt binaries for LLVM and clang are easily accessible:

[http://llvm.org/releases/download.html](http://llvm.org/releases/download.html)

~~~
zamalek
> Prebuilt binaries for LLVM and clang are easily accessible

Admittedly I haven't checked in a few months, however, either only one VC
version (VC breaks either ABI or stdlib compatibility with almost every
release) or only the release runtime (stdlib incompatible with the debug
runtime) is available, I can't remember which. That's the case with most OSS
C++ projects - even on Windows it's best to just build from source.

I don't remember being particularly annoyed with the build time, but then
again I'm not using it for anything job related.

~~~
vmorgulis
> That's the case with most OSS C++ projects - even on Windows it's best to
> just build from source.

Yes, it's better.

Building clang+llvm takes about 2 hours on my machine. Last time I used the
prebuilt binaries to check the status of C++17 in clang. I remember looking at
the paths with "ldd" to see if their clang linked properly with their llvm. It
was OK.

There is an ongoing ABI change in gcc for C++. Maybe it's finished now.

