Cling C++ Interpreter Looking To Upstream More Code Into LLVM

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Cling C++ Interpreter Looking To Upstream More Code Into LLVM

Not to be confused with Clang as the well known C/C++ compiler front-end for the LLVM compiler, Cling is a separate project as an interactive, JIT-based C++ interpreter. Cling has been in development for years and at least partially is looking to upstream where possible back into LLVM...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=CLING-LLVM-Upstream-Talk

[dev_null]

A nice tool, I several times evaluated it as a scripting language instead of python or lua. I also wanted a c++ REPL console. but it lacks an ability to delete or redefine a variable/class/function what makes it near to not usable for my purposes, now there is a new hope somebody will implement this

[Nth_man]

There's an explanatory video in https://medium.com/@enogrob/cling-th...r-a55376a04957

[kpedersen]

I was really hoping Epic were going to look at something like this for their toolchain to allow for fast debug iterations and then standard Clang for completely overhead-free release builds.
However I have a feeling it might be a bit too hard to implement.

It does remind me a little bit of Q3VM and the LCC compiler approach taken by id Software

[vladpetric]

A nice tool, I several times evaluated it as a scripting language instead of python or lua. I also wanted a c++ REPL console. but it lacks an ability to delete or redefine a variable/class/function what makes it near to not usable for my purposes, now there is a new hope somebody will implement this

Man, that's such a showstopper ... thanks for pointing it out.

So essentially you can undo, but only the last n things, not just one, at position n-k, correct?

[dev_null]

Man, that's such a showstopper ... thanks for pointing it out.

So essentially you can undo, but only the last n things, not just one, at position n-k, correct?

Right, if nothing changed. I didn't check it for a year for now/

[ax3l]

Redefinitions were important for me as well, so we joined the annual user meeting,brainstormed about this, and suggested the following two years ago: https://github.com/root-project/cling/issues/259

Since then the core Cling team took it on and re-definitions are now allowed. It's implemented, merged and it will be part of the next release. There is even a paper on it: https://doi.org/10.1145/3377555.3377901