On 02/09/10 18:28, Jim Grosbach wrote:> On Sep 2, 2010, at 4:05 AM, Renato Golin wrote:[...]>> I suggest you getting the SVN code, since quite a lot has changed >> since last freeze. > > Vigourously seconded. It's very true in general, but with regards to debug information in particular, "quite a lot has changed since 2.7" is an understatement. It's an area of extremely active development (and improvement!).I really don't want to build from SVN --- developing against a moving target is never fun, and apart from anything else, it makes it much harder for anyone else to use my code. I gather 2.8 is coming along soon; is there an ETA yet? And until then is there a snapshot of the 2.7 documentation anywhere online? (PS. Please don't cc me on replies. I'm on the list, I don't need two copies.) -- ┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ───── │ │ life←{ ↑1 ⍵∨.^3 4=+/,¯1 0 1∘.⊖¯1 0 1∘.⌽⊂⍵ } │ --- Conway's Game Of Life, in one line of APL -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 262 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100902/29cc70fb/attachment.sig>
Chris Lattner
2010-Sep-02 18:21 UTC
[LLVMdev] Line number information (and other metadata)
On Sep 2, 2010, at 11:16 AM, David Given wrote:> On 02/09/10 18:28, Jim Grosbach wrote: >> On Sep 2, 2010, at 4:05 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > [...] >>> I suggest you getting the SVN code, since quite a lot has changed >>> since last freeze. >> >> Vigourously seconded. It's very true in general, but with regards to debug information in particular, "quite a lot has changed since 2.7" is an understatement. It's an area of extremely active development (and improvement!). > > I really don't want to build from SVN --- developing against a moving > target is never fun, and apart from anything else, it makes it much > harder for anyone else to use my code. > > I gather 2.8 is coming along soon; is there an ETA yet? And until then > is there a snapshot of the 2.7 documentation anywhere online? >The schedule is on the right side of the http://llvm.org/ web page. -Chris
On 2 September 2010 19:16, David Given <dg at cowlark.com> wrote:> I really don't want to build from SVN --- developing against a moving > target is never fun, and apart from anything else, it makes it much > harder for anyone else to use my code.Actually, unless you're planning to release your code in less than 2 months, developing in the SVN makes much more sense than 2.7.> I gather 2.8 is coming along soon; is there an ETA yet? And until then > is there a snapshot of the 2.7 documentation anywhere online?>From the homepage, If you go on docs, there's a red message pointingyou to here: http://llvm.org/releases/ Which contains downloads, release notes and the docs for every release.> (PS. Please don't cc me on replies. I'm on the list, I don't need two > copies.)Your mail client should know better... Mine does. ;) You're not being CC'd, the list is... -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/ Reclaim your digital rights, eliminate DRM, learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm
On 02/09/10 20:21, Renato Golin wrote: [...]> Which contains downloads, release notes and the docs for every release.Unfortunately the doxygen API documentation link at http://llvm.org/releases/2.7/docs/index.html actually link to the main doxygen pages, which appear to be based on head-of-SVN. In fact, the doxygen links for *all* releases point there! Is this intention, or a linkage failure? (I find the doxygen docs really useful as an index to let me find which headers actually contain the classes.) [...]>> (PS. Please don't cc me on replies. I'm on the list, I don't need two >> copies.) > > Your mail client should know better... Mine does. ;) You're not being > CC'd, the list is...Yeah, sorry, that was the wrong piece of boilerplate. I suppose I should really add a new boilerplate for 'Please don't send list messages directly to me as that way they don't have the List-Id header, which means that even though procmail is correctly filtering the messages my MUA doesn't know they belong to a mailing list, and therefore doesn't show a 'Reply To List' option, thus forcing me to either manually edit the sender list every time I want to reply to one of these messages, or else have to write procmail rules to manually reinsert the List-Id header for messages that are cc'd to the list but haven't arrived via the mailing list server, and forcing me to have to read the procmailrc man page is just *evil*', but that's a bit long... (Plus it's antisocial for anyone who reads the mailing list via GMANE NNTP, message digests, etc.) -- ┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ───── │ │ "Home is where, when you have to go there, they have to take you in." │ --- Cordelia Naismith -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 254 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100903/82a9f9bb/attachment.sig>