search for: clinge

Hi Richard, On 7/10/20 11:10 PM, Richard Smith wrote: > Hi Vassil, > > This is a very exciting proposal that I can imagine bringing important > benefits to the existing cling users and also to the clang user and > developer community. Thank you for all the work you and your team have > done on cling so far and for offering to bring that work under the > LLVM umbrella!

Motivation === Over the last decade we have developed an interactive, interpretative C++ (aka REPL) as part of the high-energy physics (HEP) data analysis project -- ROOT [1-2]. We invested a significant  effort to replace the CINT C++ interpreter with a newly implemented REPL based on llvm -- cling [3]. The cling infrastructure is a core component of the data analysis framework of ROOT and

I like cling, and having it integrated with the rest of the project would be neat. I agree with Hal’s suggestion to explain the design of what remains. It sounds like a pretty small amount of code. > On Jul 9, 2020, at 7:25 PM, Hal Finkel via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I think that it would be great to have infrastructure for incremental C++ compilation,

On 7/10/20 1:57 PM, Vassil Vassilev wrote: > On 7/10/20 6:43 AM, JF Bastien wrote: >> I like cling, and having it integrated with the rest of the project >> would be neat. I agree with Hal’s suggestion to explain the design of >> what remains. It sounds like a pretty small amount of code. > > >   JF, Hal, did you mean you want a design document of how cling in >

I do not know enough about cling, but I like what you describe very much, am particularly intrigued about how your approach could also be appropriated to do ahead-of-time constexpr metaprogramming as well, which also involves incrementally adding declarations to the translation unit. Dave > On Jul 9, 2020, at 11:43 PM, JF Bastien via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >

Dear Sir/Madam Our company, 4Js software, has developed an SQL data base software that runs under different operating systems: Windows, Linux, Mac OS X. This software compiles each SQL statement into a C program that is compiled "on the fly" and executed by our JIT, Just In Time compiler. We wanted to port it to Apple's iOS, and spent a lot of time retargetting the JIT for

Jun 14 07:35:20 cling imap-login: Login: tallison [192.168.1.10] Jun 14 07:35:21 cling dovecot: child 17755 (imap) killed with signal 11 --- I run into this when I try to enter one folder. The rest are fine.

Dear LLVM-Developers and Vinod Grover, we are trying to extend the cling C++ interpreter (https://github.com/root-project/cling) with CUDA functionality for Nvidia GPUs. I already developed a prototype based on OrcJIT and am seeking for feedback. I am currently a stuck with a runtime issue, on which my interpreter prototype fails to execute kernels with a CUDA runtime error. === How to use the

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:57:46AM +0200, Armin Steinhoff wrote: > > Hi, > > first problem was: > > >FileManager.cpp:311:21: error: range-based ‘for’ loops are not allowed > >in C++98 mode > >for (auto & fe: SeenFileEntries) { > >^ > >FileManager.cpp:312:14: error: request for member ‘getValue’ in ‘fe’, > >which is of non-class type ‘int’

Hi Lang, thank You very much. I've used Your code and the creating of the object file works. I think the problem is after creating the object file. When I link the object file with ld I get an executable, which is working right. After changing the clang and llvm libraries from the package control version (.deb) to a own compiled version with debug options, I get an assert() fault. In void

Hi, I ran into a problem migrating cling (finally!) to MCJIT: When an ("outer") MCJIT's finalization / llvm::RuntimeDyldImpl::resolveExternalSymbols() is called and a symbol is not known, cling can help by loading the suitable library and providing the symbol. It compiles the relevant C++ header as part of loading the library. This compilation emits symbols through the MCJIT. That

On Jul 8, 2008, at 4:57 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, David Greene wrote: >>> Since I think it really is a part of the LLVM internals, I don't >>> think >>> that mangling it with a prefix is the right way to go. This would >>> significantly increase verbosity in the code and would be generally >>> detrimental. >>

Indeed ld does link it. The reason I am using llvm-ld, is for its unique functionality. I intend to link to object files together (created by cling), and link them with llvm-ld. The main feature that I am currently interested in is the ability to have "inline functions" between two object files. This was basically impossible with gcc. Is there any way to make the raw binary with llvm?

On 2012-12-01 21:57, Gregory Szorc wrote: > I'd like to continue the discussion about minimum Python versions from the "Use multiprocessing instead of threading" thread in its own thread because I feel it warrants additional discussion. ... > For these reasons, I urge LLVM to drop support for Python older than 2.6. I would encourage requiring 2.7 (preferably the latest

LGTM. I will commit. On Oct 10, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > The attached is the fix to radar://11663049. The optimization can be outlined by following rules: > > (select (x != c), e, c) -> select (x != c), e, x), > (select (x == c), c, e) -> select (x == c), x, e) > where the <c> is an integer

On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 2012-12-01 21:57, Gregory Szorc wrote: >> >> I'd like to continue the discussion about minimum Python versions from the >> "Use multiprocessing instead of threading" thread in its own thread because >> I feel it warrants additional discussion. > > ... >

Hello: I am told that compile cling, from CERN, I need revision 165095. HOW do I check out that version? When going through the /tags directory, all version are 17xxxx. I tried svn checkout -r 165095 http://xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx llvm but it will not work with either /truck or /tags I tried svn checkout http://xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx at 165095, but that also doen't work

Hi, I don't know if this is the correct term. Let me elaborate. From time to time, I want to expunge (?) the mail folder so that users' Trash'd mails don't occupy space. So, here are my questions: 1. Is this the correct term? 2. Is it a Good Idea? to do it? Thanks, -- mto

Hi, I'm finally moving cling to MCJIT - and MCJIT is wonderful! So far I only ran into this issue: $ cat linkonceodr.cxx extern "C" int printf(const char*,...); template <class T> struct StaticStuff { static T s_data; }; template <class T> T StaticStuff<T>::s_data = 42; int compareAddr(int* mcjit); #ifdef BUILD_SHARED int compareAddr(int* mcjit) { if (mcjit

I'd like to continue the discussion about minimum Python versions from the "Use multiprocessing instead of threading" thread in its own thread because I feel it warrants additional discussion. In that thread, we were discussing maintaining support for Python 2.4 and 2.5. The latest response is: On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org> wrote: >