Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "astbuilder".
Did you mean:
aospbuilder
2016 Oct 31
2
What was the IR made for precisely?
...times now C++) language
> constructs, I think that something like this is the best of all bad
> options. Really, however, it depends only on the AST and CodeGen, and maybe
> those (along with 'Basic', etc.) could be made into a separately-compilable
> library. Along with an easy ASTBuilder for C types and function
> declarations we should be able to satisfy this use case.
>
> -Hal
>
> >
> > -Chris
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > http://lists.llvm.or...
2016 Oct 28
4
What was the IR made for precisely?
> On Oct 28, 2016, at 1:21 AM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> On 28 Oct 2016, at 02:43, ジョウェットジェームス <b3i4zz1gu1 at docomo.ne.jp> wrote:
>>
>> I would need to sum up all the rules and ABIs and sizes for all the targets I need and generate different IR for each, am I correct?
>
> This is a long-known limitation of LLVM IR and
2016 Oct 28
0
What was the IR made for precisely?
...terms of C (and sometimes now C++) language constructs, I think that something like this is the best of all bad options. Really, however, it depends only on the AST and CodeGen, and maybe those (along with 'Basic', etc.) could be made into a separately-compilable library. Along with an easy ASTBuilder for C types and function declarations we should be able to satisfy this use case.
-Hal
>
> -Chris
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
--...
2016 Oct 31
0
What was the IR made for precisely?
...times now C++)
> language constructs, I think that something like this is the best of
> all bad options. Really, however, it depends only on the AST and
> CodeGen, and maybe those (along with 'Basic', etc.) could be made
> into a separately-compilable library. Along with an easy ASTBuilder
> for C types and function declarations we should be able to satisfy
> this use case.
>
> -Hal
>
> >
> > -Chris
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > http://lists....
2008 Mar 19
0
[LLVMdev] Proposal for GSoC project for clang front end
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Argiris Kirtzidis wrote:
> I'd like to hear your opinions and ideas for a proposal to improve
> support for C++ parsing for LLVM's clang front end.
Some meta feedback: C++ support in clang is a huge project, far and away
more than any mortal can get done in a summer. While it would be possible
to sketch out the parser itself in the summer (providing the
2008 Mar 19
5
[LLVMdev] Proposal for GSoC project for clang front end
Hi all,
I'd like to hear your opinions and ideas for a proposal to improve
support for C++ parsing for LLVM's clang front end.
Goal:
Improve clang's C++ support. The scope of the project will be limited to
C++ parsing, not code generation (I think the
timeframe of a GSoC project and the complexity of C++ doesn't allow full
C++ support to be developed).
C++ parsing support