Our great sponsors
qbe-rs | ubpf | |
---|---|---|
29 | 5 | |
66 | 746 | |
- | 2.1% | |
3.3 | 8.5 | |
8 months ago | 4 days ago | |
Rust | C | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
qbe-rs
-
Odin Programming Language
> I think it uses a different backend than LLVM
harec uses https://c9x.me/compile/
-
Frontend for GCC?
Have you considered QBE?
- QBE – Compiler Back End
-
What do C programmers think of the Zig language in 2023?
I really hope other new projects (like QBE) can really grow and become widely used
-
Toy C compiler, worth having an IR stage?
I really liked targetting QBE (https://c9x.me/compile/) as an IR, as it gave me lots of back-end optimisations for free 😊.
-
C or LLVM for a fast backend?
There is: QBE.
-
A whirlwind tour of the LLVM optimizer
You might be underestimating the accuracy of the CPU models LLVM uses.
For x86, the same data the code generator uses drives llvm-mca[1], which given a loop body can tell you the throughput, latency, and microarchitectural bottlenecks (decoding, ports, dependencies, store forwarding, etc.)—if not always precisely, then still not worse then IACA, the tool written at Intel by people who presumably knew how the CPUs work, unlike LLVM contributors and the rest of us who can only guess and measure. This separately for Haswell, Sandy Bridge, Skylake, etc.; not “x86”.
Now, is this the best model you can get? Not exactly[2], but it’s close enough to not matter. Do we often need machine code to be optimized to that level of detail? Perhaps not[3], and with that in mind you can shave at least a factor of ten off LLVM’s considerable bulk at the cost of 20—30% of performance[4,5]. But if you do want those as well, it seems that the complexity of LLVM is a fair price, or has the right order of magnitude at least.
(Frontend not included, C++ frontend required to bootstrap sold separately, at a similar markup compared to a C-only frontend with somewhat worse ergonomics.)
[1] https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/llvm-mca.html
[2] https://www.uops.info/
[3] https://briancallahan.net/blog/20211010.html
[4] https://c9x.me/compile/
[5] https://drewdevault.com/talks/qbe.html
-
Made my first LLVM front-end… Now what?
You can try buildling you own backend like llvm. A good example or starting point is probably QBE since it is extremely small but very functional.
- Best book on writing an optimizing compiler (inlining, types, abstract interpretation)?
-
Rust port of B3 from WebKit, LLVM-like backend
How big is the whole backend? I've heard that it is small but I wanted to compare it to QBE which is around 8 KLoC and it is quite interesting too.
ubpf
-
Rust-Written Linux Scheduler Showing Promising Results for Gaming Performance
eBPF doesn't run in user space in the context of eBPF in the linux kernel. It's verified so that the kernel can be sure it won't loop forever and then gets JIT'ed and run in kernel space.
There are some user space BPF vms like https://github.com/iovisor/ubpf and Solana.
-
bpftime: Extending eBPF from Kernel to Userspace
ubpf: https://github.com/iovisor/ubpf
-
Ask HN: Recommendation for general purpose JIT compiler
The usual recommendation have been given. Now for more touristic approach what I would like to use if given excuse and time. All those options are mostly written in C:
- QBE [1] - small compiler backend with nice IL
- DynASM [2] - IIUC the laujit's backend, that can and is used by other languages
- uBPF - Userspace eBPF VM. Depending on your DSL the eBPF toolchain could fit your use-case, but this would probably be the biggest excursion.
[1] https://c9x.me/compile/
[2] https://luajit.org/dynasm.html
[3] https://github.com/iovisor/ubpf
-
how to build eBPF learning env on my Mac
There are eBPF-specific userspace implementations you can consider looking into but right now the best support for bpf would be the linux kernel so if the goal is learning you'll most likely want to run linux in a proper virtual machine (e.g. Qemu, VirtualBox, Parallels, etc.)
-
Bytecode for a Register Machine
This may be entirely irrelevant to what you are looking for, but a good widely used finite register-based VM is the eBPF VM in the Linux Kernel. The IOVisor uBPF project (https://github.com/iovisor/ubpf) is a version of the VM in user space.
What are some alternatives?
mir - A lightweight JIT compiler based on MIR (Medium Internal Representation) and C11 JIT compiler and interpreter based on MIR
Befunge - lang befunge 93 fast
minivm - A VM That is Dynamic and Fast
sljit - Platform independent low-level JIT compiler
c4 - C in four functions
well - The Future of Assembly Language. https://wellang.github.io/well/
LjTools - LuaJIT 2.0 bytecode parser, viewer, assembler and test VM. Lua 5.1 parser, IDE and debugger.
wasmtime - A fast and secure runtime for WebAssembly
Som - Parser, code model, navigable browser and VM for the SOM Smalltalk dialect
MAD-NG.docs - MAD documentation