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/
Okay, let me reiterate. The llvm2cpp option is *already* on the demo script page. If you choose that option, you just get an error message because llvm2cpp can't be found. Its harmless and everything else still works. I won't change the script for a couple of weeks, per Tanya's and your request. Reid. On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 10:48 -0700, Chris Lattner wrote:> 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 >
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Reid Spencer wrote:> Okay, let me reiterate. The llvm2cpp option is *already* on the demo > script page. If you choose that option, you just get an error message > because llvm2cpp can't be found. Its harmless and everything else still > works. > > I won't change the script for a couple of weeks, per Tanya's and your > request.Ok, sounds good, thanks Reid! -Chris> Reid. > > On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 10:48 -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: >> 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 >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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/