search for: llvm_ocaml

Hi everyone,                    I am new in this field. I am trying to install LLVM in my 32-bit Windows XP. Can anyone please give a to do list for installing LLVM in my machine. When trying to build LLVM, I get the following error:    llvm[3]: Compiling llvm_ocaml.c for Debug build In file included from D:\Program Files\Objective Caml\lib/caml/misc.h:24,                  from D:\Program Files\Objective Caml\lib/caml/alloc.h:23,                  from llvm_ocaml.c:19: D:\Program Files\Objective Caml\lib/caml/config.h:140: error: expected `=', `  `;', `...

--- bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.ml | 2 +- bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.mli | 2 +- bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c | 2 +- include/llvm-c/Core.h | 32 +++++++++++++++++++------------- 4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 316a84e85ed2363551149e65a227c8e7c8192624.diff Type: text/x-patch Size: 5061 b...

I noticed that the ocaml compilation isn't using the .opt executables if they're available. We might gain a slight optimization in ocaml compile time by optionally using them with this patch. --- autoconf/configure.ac | 18 +++++ configure | 195 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 188 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) -------------- next part

Hi Erick, Thanks, this looks good. Can you please resubmit this patch, and the others, as an attachment? On Mar 4, 2008, at 03:19, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > --- > bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.ml | 2 +- > bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.mli | 2 +- > bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c | 2 +- > include/llvm-c/Core.h | 32 ++++++++++++++++++ > +------------- > 4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)diff --git > bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.ml bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.ml > index 6657af5..ea6ef71 100644 > --- bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.ml &...

Hi, Everyone, I got a error when I try to compile LLVM 2.7, it is located in the ocaml bindings file, showing like: llvm[2]: Compiling llvm_ocaml.c for Release+Asserts build In file included from C:\Objective Caml\lib/caml/misc.h:24, from C:\Objective Caml\lib/caml/alloc.h:23, from /home/leila/llvm/bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c:19: In file included from /home/leila/llvm/bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c:...

I've got ocaml installed in a non-standard location, and while the svn version of llvm seems to detect my ocaml binaries, it doesn't seem add "ocamlc -where" to the c include search path. This causes bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c to error out unless I run "make CFLAGS=`ocamlc -where`". Any chance that this could be added?

Hi, revision 111418 binding/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c /* llvalue -> int -> llvalue */ CAMLprim value llvm_params(LLVMValueRef Fn, value Index) { value Params = alloc(LLVMCountParams(Fn), 0); LLVMGetParams(Fn, (LLVMValueRef *) Op_val(Params)); return Params; } does not match the interface at binding/ocaml/llvm/llvm.ml external params :...

akramul azim <bijoy123_8 at yahoo.com> writes: > I am new in this field. I am trying to install LLVM > in my 32-bit Windows XP. Can anyone please give a to do list for > installing LLVM in my machine. When trying to build LLVM, I get the > following error: [snip] > llvm_ocaml.c:523: error: `int64' undeclared (first use in this function) [snip] > Can anyone tell me what is the problem? Possibly the OCaml bindings are broken on Windows/MinGW. Try building with cmake instead of configure&make. The cmake build ignores the OCaml bindings. http://www.llvm.org/doc...

..., at 01:28, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > I've got ocaml installed in a non-standard location, and while the > svn version of llvm seems to detect my ocaml binaries, it doesn't > seem add "ocamlc -where" to the c include search path. This causes > bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c to error out unless I run "make > CFLAGS=`ocamlc -where`". Any chance that this could be added? Erick, Please try after this commit. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of- Mon-20071001/054221.html — Gordon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML atta...

On Mar 4, 2008, at 09:18, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > Hi Erick, > > Thanks, this looks good. Can you please resubmit this patch, and the > others, as an attachment? > > On Mar 4, 2008, at 03:19, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > >> diff --git include/llvm-c/Core.h include/llvm-c/Core.h >> index 9b11df5..3676377 100644 >> --- include/llvm-c/Core.h >> +++

Thanks Gordon. This patch should make the changes you requested.

...BitcodeWriter.cpp (+23 -10) lib/VMCore/AsmWriter.cpp (+2) lib/AsmParser/llvmAsmParser.y (+13 -3) lib/AsmParser/LLLexer.cpp (+1) lib/Transforms/Utils/CloneModule.cpp (+2) include/llvm-c/Core.h (+2) lib/VMCore/Core.cpp (+13) bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.ml (+2) bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c (+23) bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.mli (+9) test/Bindings/Ocaml/vmcore.ml (+16 -3) Adds these methods to Function and makes corresponding changes to assembly and bitcode: bool hasCollector() const; const char *getCollector() const; void setCollector(const char *); void clearCollector(); Th...

...akefile which will be used by the ocaml language bindings. configure is schooled how to sniff ocamlc and ocamlopt. This patch is independent. //===-- ocaml-bindings.patch (+936) ---------------------------===// bindings/ocaml/llvm bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.ml (+226) bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm_ocaml.c (+394) bindings/ocaml/llvm/llvm.mli (+168) bindings/ocaml/llvm/Makefile (+24) bindings/ocaml/bitwriter bindings/ocaml/bitwriter/llvm_bitwriter.mli (+18) bindings/ocaml/bitwriter/bitwriter_ocaml.c (+31) bindings/ocaml/bitwriter/llvm_bitwriter.ml (+18) bindings/ocaml/bitwriter/...

...this is subject to the quirks and complexities of the Ocaml FFI (e.g., overflow arguments passed in a global array on x86, totally nonstandard calling convention). - If you know in advance the signature of the functions you're going to call, you can write shims in C (similar to those in llvm_ocaml.c) that will add not terribly much overhead. These wouldn't really be of any use to anyone else, though. - If not, you can generate the shims at runtime using LLVM (even inline them into the callee), but will have to reimplement Ocaml's FFI macros for unwrapping values and tracking...

This is a small bug fix for the ocaml build system that allows for dependencies to be generated for ocaml interface files. --- bindings/ocaml/Makefile.ocaml | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 7c62c2cd93a6402e5f6ebd600e9e3ac7851b4d29.diff Type: text/x-patch Size: 994 bytes Desc: not

...> llbuilder -> llvalue = "llvm_build_phi" Have the builder as the last argument, instead of the first as it normally is done in ocaml libraries. It also hampers currying, but I'm not sure how often that would be used. The downside is that we'd have to translate the order in llvm_ocaml.c, but since more of the functions I want to do this to already have bindings in there, we wouldn't really have any extra overhead.

I'm having another play with LLVM using the OCaml bindings for a forthcoming OCaml Journal article and I have a couple of remarks: Firstly, I noticed that the execute engine is very slow, taking milliseconds to call a JIT compiled function. Is this an inherent overhead or am I calling it incorrectly or is this something that can be optimized in the OCaml bindings? Secondly, I happened to

Erick, After some experimentation, I'd prefer the closed system. LLVM has some type peculiarities like the commonality between CallInst and InvokeInst. I find that the closed type system lets me express such constraints more naturally. Expressing these constraints explicitly in the open system involves annotating the C++ class hierarchy with extra variants which are unnecessary in

Hi all, I'm authoring a C interface to the LLVM IR type system. Since this is Really Quite Tedious, I would like to solicit opinions before I get too far down any paths that seem offensive. I've attached the header, where I've mapped a portion of Module and most of Type and its subclasses. This is working, and I've built ocaml bindings on top of it.[1] My intent is to