First of all, llvm has clang, which means that llvm as a whole is equipped to understand C (and C++ and Objective-C) both at a high level (abstract syntax tree, all types as declared by the programmer) and low level (SSA form, only the types that are meaningful for sound analysis and optimization).
I think that CIL was a really big deal before llvm and clang. Back then, it was a more approachable alternative to trying to fiddle with C than using GCC, since GCC has a steep learning curve. But in the last 15 years or so, most of the research that would have been done in CIL before is now done in llvm. That’s because llvm is much more complete and it’s designed for ergonomics, specifically in the case where you just want to mess around and even if you’re a newcomer to the compiler. The docs are great and the APIs are top notch.
I think that LLVM’s SSA form is especially good for doing sophisticated analysis and instrumentation of C. I’ve used that a lot for my C experiments. Clang’s AST is really great, too - and it’s amazing for doing higher level stuff where you want to see the original C types and declarations before lowering.
I suspect that there is very little that CIL can do for you that can’t be done in llvm more straightforwardly. And llvm+clang support all of C, plus the adjacent languages (C++ and others).
So, it’s cool that CIL is still around (having alternatives is good, generally) but in my opinion as someone who does experimental work in C compilers, C language extensions, and static/dynamic analysis of C, llvm completely subsumes CIL.
First of all, llvm has clang, which means that llvm as a whole is equipped to understand C (and C++ and Objective-C) both at a high level (abstract syntax tree, all types as declared by the programmer) and low level (SSA form, only the types that are meaningful for sound analysis and optimization).
I think that CIL was a really big deal before llvm and clang. Back then, it was a more approachable alternative to trying to fiddle with C than using GCC, since GCC has a steep learning curve. But in the last 15 years or so, most of the research that would have been done in CIL before is now done in llvm. That’s because llvm is much more complete and it’s designed for ergonomics, specifically in the case where you just want to mess around and even if you’re a newcomer to the compiler. The docs are great and the APIs are top notch.
I think that LLVM’s SSA form is especially good for doing sophisticated analysis and instrumentation of C. I’ve used that a lot for my C experiments. Clang’s AST is really great, too - and it’s amazing for doing higher level stuff where you want to see the original C types and declarations before lowering.
I suspect that there is very little that CIL can do for you that can’t be done in llvm more straightforwardly. And llvm+clang support all of C, plus the adjacent languages (C++ and others).
So, it’s cool that CIL is still around (having alternatives is good, generally) but in my opinion as someone who does experimental work in C compilers, C language extensions, and static/dynamic analysis of C, llvm completely subsumes CIL.