&gt; Is it more portable in a way that matters though?<p>A few months ago when I was trying to compile swiftc&#x27;s IR with emscripten, I would have said &quot;definitely yes&quot;.  It didn&#x27;t work both because of a LLVM version mismatch and because, well, the NaCl backend passes were apparently only tested on IR generated by Clang - random differences in what swiftc generated, like using &#x27;add&#x27; with a constant right hand side instead of get-element-ptr, not simplifying struct returns to return-via-pointer-argument, etc. made it variously abort or outright crash.  As you know, Rust has never really worked with it either due to the version mismatch.<p>Admittedly, though, that&#x27;s mainly emscripten&#x27;s fault, and I expect the new WebAssembly backend in trunk to be much more robust.  Other than that, a few reasons I can think of to want to compile to C:<p>- Performance.  Other compiler backends often produce more efficient code than LLVM; not always, but it&#x27;s nice to be able to test several independent production-quality C compilers and pick the fastest, while with LLVM IR you&#x27;re stuck with what you have.  Same goes for compilation speed, though LLVM usually ranks well at that, and even working around optimizer bugs.<p>- Windows support for LLVM is still not up to par yet.  Supposedly it will be in the near future.<p>- (edit) Easier to integrate with unusual platform-specific compilation modes, like C++&#x2F;CLI or Apple&#x27;s LLVM bitcode distribution (well, that is LLVM, but imagine in the future someone comes up with a similar system based on a different compiler).<p>- You can distribute the C output from your compiler, and others can use it without having to work your compiler into their build process.  Like distributing object files, but those only work on one platform, while C works anywhere.  (Caveat: compilers often need to know data layout, which in practice means you might need to have separate C outputs for 64-bit and 32-bit pointer sizes, and not support any more exotic data representations.  But that&#x27;s still way more portable than an object file.)  Notably, even if you only need to distribute to people using LLVM, LLVM IR is not designed to be cross-platform.<p>Incidentally, for this reason, I&#x27;d love if someone made a Rust to C compiler, preferably working on the AST level to avoid the unreadable spaghetti that the LLVM C backend used to generate.  It&#x27;s easier to say &quot;swap out this insecure C library with a secure Rust library&quot; (to a larger C&#x2F;C++ program) if doing so is a matter of swapping C files - distributing &#x27;binaries&#x27; is suboptimal from a maintainability perspective, but not much worse than, e.g., SQLite&#x27;s &quot;amalgamation&quot; distribution.