|  | By Chris: | 
|  |  | 
|  | LLVM has been designed with two primary goals in mind.  First we strive to | 
|  | enable the best possible division of labor between static and dynamic | 
|  | compilers, and second, we need a flexible and powerful interface | 
|  | between these two complementary stages of compilation.  We feel that | 
|  | providing a solution to these two goals will yield an excellent solution | 
|  | to the performance problem faced by modern architectures and programming | 
|  | languages. | 
|  |  | 
|  | A key insight into current compiler and runtime systems is that a | 
|  | compiler may fall in anywhere in a "continuum of compilation" to do its | 
|  | job.  On one side, scripting languages statically compile nothing and | 
|  | dynamically compile (or equivalently, interpret) everything.  On the far | 
|  | other side, traditional static compilers process everything statically and | 
|  | nothing dynamically.  These approaches have typically been seen as a | 
|  | tradeoff between performance and portability.  On a deeper level, however, | 
|  | there are two reasons that optimal system performance may be obtained by a | 
|  | system somewhere in between these two extremes: Dynamic application | 
|  | behavior and social constraints. | 
|  |  | 
|  | From a technical perspective, pure static compilation cannot ever give | 
|  | optimal performance in all cases, because applications have varying dynamic | 
|  | behavior that the static compiler cannot take into consideration.  Even | 
|  | compilers that support profile guided optimization generate poor code in | 
|  | the real world, because using such optimization tunes that application | 
|  | to one particular usage pattern, whereas real programs (as opposed to | 
|  | benchmarks) often have several different usage patterns. | 
|  |  | 
|  | On a social level, static compilation is a very shortsighted solution to | 
|  | the performance problem.  Instruction set architectures (ISAs) continuously | 
|  | evolve, and each implementation of an ISA (a processor) must choose a set | 
|  | of tradeoffs that make sense in the market context that it is designed for. | 
|  | With every new processor introduced, the vendor faces two fundamental | 
|  | problems: First, there is a lag time between when a processor is introduced | 
|  | to when compilers generate quality code for the architecture.  Secondly, | 
|  | even when compilers catch up to the new architecture there is often a large | 
|  | body of legacy code that was compiled for previous generations and will | 
|  | not or can not be upgraded.  Thus a large percentage of code running on a | 
|  | processor may be compiled quite sub-optimally for the current | 
|  | characteristics of the dynamic execution environment. | 
|  |  | 
|  | For these reasons, LLVM has been designed from the beginning as a long-term | 
|  | solution to these problems.  Its design allows the large body of platform | 
|  | independent, static, program optimizations currently in compilers to be | 
|  | reused unchanged in their current form.  It also provides important static | 
|  | type information to enable powerful dynamic and link time optimizations | 
|  | to be performed quickly and efficiently.  This combination enables an | 
|  | increase in effective system performance for real world environments. |