search for: charlesneedspac

...rmail/llvmdev/2011-December/046055.html  is there a branch where this is being work on, or is internal chromium project so far? Also i'm not sure if this is exactly the same as what i'm looking for, but it sounds similar enough ________________________________ De: Charllls Alquarra <charlesneedspace at yahoo.com.ar> Para: "LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu" <> Enviado: sábado, 2 de junio de 2012 12:14 Asunto: [LLVMdev] dynamic linkage for jit Hi, I want to execute functions in a module, this module will have dependencies resolved in other modules. the modules might change (dyn...

...du/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-December/046055.html > > is there a branch where this is being work on, or is internal chromium project > so far? Also i'm not sure if this is exactly the same as what i'm looking for, > but it sounds similar enough > > *De:* Charllls Alquarra <charlesneedspace at yahoo.com.ar> > *Para:* "LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu" <> > *Enviado:* sábado, 2 de junio de 2012 12:14 > *Asunto:* [LLVMdev] dynamic linkage for jit > > > > Hi, > > I want to execute functions in a module, this module will have dependencies > resolved...

Hi, I want to execute functions in a module, this module will have dependencies resolved in other modules. the modules might change (dynamic compilation environment) so i would prefer not not link all the dependencies in a single monolithic module, that is, if it can be avoided I hope to use Linker::linkModules but this is always destructive. That is ok for one module depending on a single one,

Hi, >Am 02.05.2011 um 11:05 schrieb Anton Korobeynikov: > >> Hello Toralf, >> >>> I wanted to ask what the current status of llvm-stack-switch[1] is. >> Given that this project never appeared in this mailing list - have you >> tried to ask its author? > >It is on the mailing list. This is how I found this project.

--- wednesday 11-may-11, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com> wrote: > > > > However, it has always seemed to me that exception > handling (at least on c++) is just a particular syntax of a > subset of coroutine semantics: > > This is certainly one way of implementing exceptions.  > Unfortunately, it would be prohibitively expensive to create > a new coroutine

Generally speaking, when writing a llvm frontend, one will take an AST and first check that its semantics is well-defined. After this, one will take the AST and perform the IR build phase. I was wondering, how realistic is to perform directly the IR build phase onto the AST, and if errors are found during the build process, revert any partial changes to the module object? i assume something like

Hi all, Is it too soon to start porting EH code to the new C++ API? Are there sample implementations? llvm.org/demo still uses the old EH gizmos. should we wait for 3.0 release? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110930/3bc09ea9/attachment.html>

On Apr 13, 2011, at 21:43 CDT, John McCall wrote: > And it's okay to have limited goals! I personally don't; I think we > should aim to get the IR design good enough to support crazy resumptive > languages with crazy custom unwinding schemes. But I need to know what > range of problems we're willing to consider solving before I can usefully > weigh different