The demo script isn't part of the release and its not failing. Do you want me to revert the changes? Reid. On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 10:08 -0700, Tanya M. Lattner wrote:> > It's already messed with, but there's no harm. If someone turns on the > > llvm2cpp option, then they get an error message at the bottom of the > > output page. All other output is normal. So, there's no harm in it. > > If/when llvm2cpp becomes available on Zion, people then the llvm2cpp > > output will appear. Note that llvm2cpp is a 1.8 release feature. My > > change was to help people learning LLVM understand how to construct the > > IR in C++. The demo facility is a good tool for that and allows me to > > direct people there so they can see how it works. > > llvm2cpp may be a 1.8 release feature, but this is something that should > have been added to the demo script before the release. I don't like the > idea of jepordizing the stability of the script during this critical > time. Critical meaning.. people will be trying out llvm and if the demo > script fails for them.. they may likely give up and not bother with LLVM. > > I don't disagree with the change. I just think the timing could be better. > > -Tanya > > > > Reid. > > > > On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 09:31 -0700, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: > >>> I'm trying to get the demo script to run llvm2cpp so that people can get > >>> familiar with the LLVM C++ API through the online demo. However, it > >>> seems that the path used doesn't include llvm2cpp (not updated in a > >>> while?). The demo script currently uses these paths on Zion: > >> > >> I can look into this, but I would strongly suggest not messing with the > >> demo script until 2-3 weeks after this latest release. > >> > >> -Tanya > >> > >>> > >>> /home/vadve/criswell/box/x86/llvm-gcc/bin/ > >>> /home/vadve/gaeke/llvm/Release/bin > >>> /home/vadve/gaeke/bin > >>> /home/vadve/gaeke/llvm/projects/Stacker/Release/bin > >>> > >>> I'm not sure what the state of John's llvm-gcc is, but using a moving > >>> target is not a good idea. Also, its likely that Brian's directories > >>> haven't been updated in erm .. a year? > >>> > >>> It would be nice if we had a "tools-only" build of LLVM available on the > >>> server that is updated, say, once per week? I'd set it up myself, but I > >>> don't have access. > >>> > >>> At the very least, can we get some modern tools into > >>> gaeke/llvm/Release/bin ? > >>> > >>> Reid. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> LLVM Developers mailing list > >>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > >>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> LLVM Developers mailing list > >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > LLVM Developers mailing list > > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> The demo script isn't part of the release and its not failing. > > Do you want me to revert the changes?No. I just said that we should avoid anymore changes for the next 2 weeks to maintain stability. -Tanya> > Reid. > > On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 10:08 -0700, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: >>> It's already messed with, but there's no harm. If someone turns on the >>> llvm2cpp option, then they get an error message at the bottom of the >>> output page. All other output is normal. So, there's no harm in it. >>> If/when llvm2cpp becomes available on Zion, people then the llvm2cpp >>> output will appear. Note that llvm2cpp is a 1.8 release feature. My >>> change was to help people learning LLVM understand how to construct the >>> IR in C++. The demo facility is a good tool for that and allows me to >>> direct people there so they can see how it works. >> >> llvm2cpp may be a 1.8 release feature, but this is something that should >> have been added to the demo script before the release. I don't like the >> idea of jepordizing the stability of the script during this critical >> time. Critical meaning.. people will be trying out llvm and if the demo >> script fails for them.. they may likely give up and not bother with LLVM. >> >> I don't disagree with the change. I just think the timing could be better. >> >> -Tanya >>> >>> Reid. >>> >>> On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 09:31 -0700, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: >>>>> I'm trying to get the demo script to run llvm2cpp so that people can get >>>>> familiar with the LLVM C++ API through the online demo. However, it >>>>> seems that the path used doesn't include llvm2cpp (not updated in a >>>>> while?). The demo script currently uses these paths on Zion: >>>> >>>> I can look into this, but I would strongly suggest not messing with the >>>> demo script until 2-3 weeks after this latest release. >>>> >>>> -Tanya >>>> >>>>> >>>>> /home/vadve/criswell/box/x86/llvm-gcc/bin/ >>>>> /home/vadve/gaeke/llvm/Release/bin >>>>> /home/vadve/gaeke/bin >>>>> /home/vadve/gaeke/llvm/projects/Stacker/Release/bin >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure what the state of John's llvm-gcc is, but using a moving >>>>> target is not a good idea. Also, its likely that Brian's directories >>>>> haven't been updated in erm .. a year? >>>>> >>>>> It would be nice if we had a "tools-only" build of LLVM available on the >>>>> server that is updated, say, once per week? I'd set it up myself, but I >>>>> don't have access. >>>>> >>>>> At the very least, can we get some modern tools into >>>>> gaeke/llvm/Release/bin ? >>>>> >>>>> Reid. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list >>>>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> LLVM Developers mailing list >>>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> LLVM Developers mailing list >>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Tanya M. Lattner wrote:>> The demo script isn't part of the release and its not failing. >> Do you want me to revert the changes? > No. I just said that we should avoid anymore changes for the next 2 weeks to > maintain stability.FWIW, I agree with Tanya on this. People *pound* on the demo page immediately after a release as they try it out and see what LLVM can do to their code. Risking instability in the demo page just isn't worth it right after the release. I agree that having an llvm2cpp option on it is great, but it shouldn't be a problem to wait a week or two. Is that reasonable Reid? -Chris>> On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 10:08 -0700, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: >> > > It's already messed with, but there's no harm. If someone turns on the >> > > llvm2cpp option, then they get an error message at the bottom of the >> > > output page. All other output is normal. So, there's no harm in it. >> > > If/when llvm2cpp becomes available on Zion, people then the llvm2cpp >> > > output will appear. Note that llvm2cpp is a 1.8 release feature. My >> > > change was to help people learning LLVM understand how to construct >> > > the >> > > IR in C++. The demo facility is a good tool for that and allows me to >> > > direct people there so they can see how it works. >> > >> > llvm2cpp may be a 1.8 release feature, but this is something that should >> > have been added to the demo script before the release. I don't like the >> > idea of jepordizing the stability of the script during this critical >> > time. Critical meaning.. people will be trying out llvm and if the demo >> > script fails for them.. they may likely give up and not bother with >> > LLVM. >> > >> > I don't disagree with the change. I just think the timing could be >> > better. >> > >> > -Tanya >> > > >> > > Reid. >> > > >> > > On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 09:31 -0700, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: >> > > > > I'm trying to get the demo script to run llvm2cpp so that people >> > > > > can get >> > > > > familiar with the LLVM C++ API through the online demo. However, >> > > > > it >> > > > > seems that the path used doesn't include llvm2cpp (not updated in >> > > > > a >> > > > > while?). The demo script currently uses these paths on Zion: >> > > > >> > > > I can look into this, but I would strongly suggest not messing with >> > > > the >> > > > demo script until 2-3 weeks after this latest release. >> > > > >> > > > -Tanya >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > /home/vadve/criswell/box/x86/llvm-gcc/bin/ >> > > > > /home/vadve/gaeke/llvm/Release/bin >> > > > > /home/vadve/gaeke/bin >> > > > > /home/vadve/gaeke/llvm/projects/Stacker/Release/bin >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm not sure what the state of John's llvm-gcc is, but using a >> > > > > moving >> > > > > target is not a good idea. Also, its likely that Brian's >> > > > > directories >> > > > > haven't been updated in erm .. a year? >> > > > > >> > > > > It would be nice if we had a "tools-only" build of LLVM available >> > > > > on the >> > > > > server that is updated, say, once per week? I'd set it up myself, >> > > > > but I >> > > > > don't have access. >> > > > > >> > > > > At the very least, can we get some modern tools into >> > > > > gaeke/llvm/Release/bin ? >> > > > > >> > > > > Reid. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > LLVM Developers mailing list >> > > > > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> > > > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > LLVM Developers mailing list >> > > > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> > > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > LLVM Developers mailing list >> > > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > LLVM Developers mailing list >> > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >> > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > >-Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/