[MLton] approaches to parallelism in ML

[Stephen Weeks]

> >> LLVM appears to be the most actively developed of the three. Is this
> >> correct? Would porting to one of these be the same amount of work as
> >> to a specific architecture?
> >
> > As a rough guess, yes.  Although my above point about instability does
> > apply.  LLVM is a less stable target than SPARC assembly.
> 
> I would say that porting to one of these projects is actually 
> significantly easier than a native codegen. 

I agree.  I'm not sure what I was thinking when I said otherwise.