search for: graef

Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> writes: > On 06/21/2012 04:22 PM, Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> About the "many features" that cmake lacks, can you provide a list, >> please? > > Generally it works fairly well, but here are some differences to the > autoconf-based build...

Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> writes: >> Here are some points worth considering: >> http://www.remlab.net/op/cmake.shtml (Some of these may already be >> addressed in newer cmake versions, I haven't checked recently.) > > [...] > > Please, some LLVM release man...

Ok, I attached it to the bug. For reference, here's what I'm using on unix as a workaround as long as this is not fixed: llvm-config --libfiles | xargs -n 1 -I {} sh -c 'test -f {} && echo {}' On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> wrote: > On 05/13/2012 02:46 AM, Keno Fischer wrote: > > Currently, there's a regression in llvm-config in both the 3.1 Release > > branch and trunk (http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11886). The > > attached patch fixes that. It would be...

On 06/22/2012 07:42 AM, David Röthlisberger wrote: > On 22 Jun 2012, at 00:08, Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> > Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> writes: >> > - libclang ends up as liblibclang.so (building clang along with LLVM). >>> >> Surely that's not intended? >> > >> > There was some discussion about this on the past, but I can't recall all >> >...

2011/10/18 Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de>: > On 10/17/2011 04:44 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> PS: A more convincing (IMO) argument against dragonegg is that it doesn't >> work on windows.  That's because the gcc plugin architecture doesn't work >> on windows.  Takumi has been...

...s quite there yet. Here are some points worth considering: http://www.remlab.net/op/cmake.shtml (Some of these may already be addressed in newer cmake versions, I haven't checked recently.) Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr.Graef at t-online.de, ag at muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag

Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> writes: [snip] > Here are some points worth considering: > http://www.remlab.net/op/cmake.shtml (Some of these may already be > addressed in newer cmake versions, I haven't checked recently.) Albert, Some points you mention on your web page are solve...

...t works (at least) on all platforms supported by LLVM right now, as well as it does right now. That remains to be proven. Otherwise you just pass the buck from MSVC developers to everyone else. Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr.Graef at t-online.de, ag at muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag

...y interface to load that dll. I'm doing it that way in my project (http://pure-lang.googlecode.com/, search for 'sys::DynamicLibrary::' in interpreter.cc) and it works fine on Windows. Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr.Graef at t-online.de, ag at muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag

...u> wrote: > Ok, I attached it to the bug. For reference, here's what I'm using on unix > as a workaround as long as this is not fixed: > llvm-config --libfiles | xargs -n 1 -I {} sh -c 'test -f {} && echo {}' > > > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> wrote: >> >> On 05/13/2012 02:46 AM, Keno Fischer wrote: >> > Currently, there's a regression in llvm-config in both the 3.1 Release >> > branch and trunk (http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11886). The >> > attached patch...

...I am not too happy with it. My focus was on finding non-ABI changing automatic tail call cases (aka gcc's sibcall). It's now done so I'll leave -tailcallopt alone for now. I'll run -tailcallopt as x86 llcbeta to see if JIT is indeed broken. Evan On Feb 5, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Albert Graef wrote: > Evan Cheng wrote: >> As far as I can tell only PPC and X86 targets are supporting this option. Does anyone actually using it? I'd prefer to just remove it to clean up the implementation if no one has any objections. > > Don't know whether that is the same, but my...

On 22 Jun 2012, at 00:08, Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> writes: > - libclang ends up as liblibclang.so (building clang along with LLVM). >> Surely that's not intended? > > There was some discussion about this on the past, but I can't recall all > the details. In any case, it is something easy en...

...e x86-64 backend of the JIT which might break tail call elimination? I didn't see any announcements about major changes in the JIT on the ml, so I have no idea what might be going wrong there. Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr.Graef at t-online.de, ag at muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag

Albert Graef <Dr.Graef at t-online.de> writes: > Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> Okay, I'll do if some day I figure out how to pass those options to the >> JIT :-) > > Well, the -fast option is easy to get: > > MP = new ExistingModuleProvider(module); > string error; >...

Albert Graef wrote: > I understand that. But in this specific case it would be very easy to > maintain, no? FWIW, suggested patch attached. That makes the LLVM 2.5 style raw_fd_ostream constructor work with the trunk (r80036). Note that this just adds a second constructor, existing code will continue to...

...nt. Of course we can stick to the latest llvm-gcc 4.2 on Windows for a while, but if there's a dragonegg version that works there then I'd certainly like to give that a whirl some time. Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr.Graef at t-online.de, ag at muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag

...be used on websites of compilers using LLVM as their backend? LLVM is getting much "brand recognition" in programmer circles these days, and the logo should help to further promote that. Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr.Graef at t-online.de, ag at muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag

PS: A more convincing (IMO) argument against dragonegg is that it doesn't work on windows. That's because the gcc plugin architecture doesn't work on windows. Takumi has been thinking about this and has been enable to get dragonegg to work on windows anyway using some clever tricks.

Dear All, I am considering a possibility of using LLVM JIT for an algebraic modelling language. I have already done some prototyping following the Kaleidoscope tutorial and currently thinking of how to connect the jitted code to a runtime library (for this language) which I would like to code in C++. If it was *NIX I would use g++ possibly with '-rdynamic' option as suggested in the

...is a real bummer for me, since Pure's batch compiler uses those methods to produce output code which then gets fed into llvmc. Is this a known problem? Will it be fixed until the 2.6 release? Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr.Graef at t-online.de, ag at muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag