search for: llvmpi

Hello all, Does anyone have any inside why I can't get the below simple C API test to link? This is on a 32-bit Gentoo Linux system and LLVM TOT which was compiled with enable-optimized, gcc is 4.3.2. 15:26|melis at juggle2:~/c/llvmpy> cat t.c #include "llvm-c/Core.h" int main() { LLVMContextRef ctx; ctx = LLVMContextCreate(); return 0; } 15:29|melis at

Is it possible to write LLVM IR but not using C++? I'm exceedingly terrible at C++. I was thinking, isn't it possible to write the IR using Java? I effectively have emit some sort of binary op codes to be passed into llvm right? The same thing for if I wanted to integrate a GC? Could the interfacing be done in any other language? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

Don't you have the same problem with other atoms, e.g. variable names? This sounds like something that should be implemented in the language's runtime library. On May 4, 2014 7:15 PM, "Alexander Popolitov" <popolit at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everyone! > > I'm trying to implement lisp's funcall function, which roughly calls a > function, name of which

"Paul Melis" <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: > 15:29|melis at juggle2:~/c/llvmpy> gcc -W -Wall -o blah `llvm-config --cflags > --ldflags --libs all` t.c > /tmp/ccs4MbKp.o: In function `main': > t.c:(.text+0x21): undefined reference to `LLVMContextCreate' > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > > 15:29|melis at juggle2:~/c/llvmpy> nm

On 10/13/14 11:44 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Dave Pitsbawn <dpitsbawn at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Is it possible to write LLVM IR but not using C++? >> >> I'm exceedingly terrible at C++. >> >> I was thinking, isn't it possible to write the IR using Java? >> > > > You can use llvmpy (Python bindings

"Paul Melis" <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: >>> 15:29|melis at juggle2:~/c/llvmpy> gcc -W -Wall -o blah `llvm-config >>> --cflags >>> --ldflags --libs all` t.c >>> /tmp/ccs4MbKp.o: In function `main': >>> t.c:(.text+0x21): undefined reference to `LLVMContextCreate' >>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

Hi Jarno, This is great! We would absolutely love to have python bindings for LLVM. From the look of your patch, I think we want this to become an LLVM project since it has configuration and compiler support that is new to the main LLVM repository. We don't want the main LLVM libraries to be dependent on Boost or Python. So, there's a couple things we need to have you do before this

Hi, some discussion below. Reid wrote: > 3. Fix your Makefile to build a shared library properly. You have set > TOOLNAME which is for building an executable tool not a shared > library. You need to set LIBRARYNAME=..., not TOOLNAME=... I remember having failed to build a functioning Python extension module with LIBRARYNAME and SHARED_LIBRARY flags. Anyway, I cannot remember

Hi, I wrote yet another [1,2] Python binding for LLVM! I'm doing this because llvmlite has some serious limitations: 1) it cannot parse an existing IR, only create new modules [3], 2) it keeps its own representation of the IR (which is less memory efficient than the LLVM one), and 3) each llvmlite version supports a single LLVM version. Considering that my need is to load modules of hundreds

Hi, I've updated the Python LLVM bindings for LLVM 1.5 (attached). I also thought of setting up a CVS repository for this, but before I do that I thought I'd ask if you want to take the Python bindings to the main LLVM CVS? I noticed that the C language bindings would be maintained there. Changes in Python-LLVM: - Updated to match LLVM 1.5 API - Added Windows build support (created

Hello, We are happy to release version 0.10.0 of llvmlite. llvmlite is a light-weight Python binding for LLVM (compatible with Python 2.7 as well as Python 3.4 and later). It stems from the needs of the Numba community and is geared towards creating JIT compilers. llvmlite is available both as source code and as binaries for a number of platforms. Source code is available on PyPI and Github:

At the LLVM Developers' Meeting in November, I promised to work on isolating a subset of the current test suite that is useful for benchmarking. Having looked at this in more detail, most of the applications and benchmarks in the test suite are useful for benchmarking, and so I think that a better way of phrasing it is that we should construct a list of programs in the test suite that are not