deno_lint VS llvm-project

$ deno lint (prefer-const) `order` is never reassigned let order = new Order() ^^^^^ at /Users/dina/try-deno/design-patterns/state.ts:106:4 hint: Use `const` instead help: for further information visit https://lint.deno.land/#prefer-const Found 24 problems Checked 25 files

I built one of the tools mentioned in the article, Deno's linter. Its binary is over 30 MiB:

After a long time, I started contributing to open-source software. For a long time, I had my eye on Deno. This week, I merged my first PR in Deno Lint. Following is the detailed post about the issue.

I read your latest post about linters and not liking ceremony involved in setting up eslint. Have you tried deno lint by any chance?

https://github.com/denoland/deno_lint

You can use it via the deno binary as well.

The beauty behind Zig is that it supports many cross-platform targets by using shims from LLVM, and almost any platform that LLVM supports, Zig will support. Let's try to write some Zig code now to add two signed integer numbers.

BOLT is a tool originally created by Facebook engineers, now it's part of mainline LLVM. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/bolt

Yep, this is why a lot of people will target something like LLVM (https://llvm.org/) or another language (like transpiling to C) so they can leverage those systems to handle platform targeting.

One illustration of this came in 2015 when Stallman decided he would rather prevent the Gnu Compiler Collection from supporting modern IDE features like symbol completion, than allow GCC front ends to be paired with free-but-not-copyleft backends like LLVM and Clang: "Since LLVM and Clang are not copylefted, they invite nonfree extensions. They are a gaping hole in the defensive wall around our city." Allowing full access to GCC's internals would have obvious technical benefits, and as far as I know Stallman advanced no technical argument against the proposal. Disallowing it put the project at a significant disadvantage at a time when its influence was already waning. The message was clear: GCC exists to serve FSF, not the other way around.

Google recently unveiled Carbon, an experimental language that is intended to match the performance of the C++ language while supporting LLVM(Low Level Vitual Machine) and being able to interoperate with existing C++ code bases. This is a big deal because C++ is by far the most widely used language for developing HIGH performance low level systems.

I wonder whether this project is based on the work in our M68k backend:

> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/llvm/lib/Targ...

You may want to look at LLVM. It’s what’s being used as a compilation foundation to build modern languages like Rust, Zig, …

Solved for now