search for: msvc10

...rt each lists as long as each would be related.) - If you can, please attach files w/o CRLF(dos encodings), or with attached text/plain. - You may split and post an article if your patches were not "series of patches" but "set of functionally individual patches". > llvm-msvc10-fix-warnings.patch: > clang-msvc10-fix-warnings.patch: > Fixes compiler warnings. Looks good to me. They could be applied when gtest guys said ok. > llvm-msvc-format-diagnostics.patch: > clang-msvc-format-diagnostics.patch: > > Complete support for msvc style diagnostics parsab...

...may be more warnings not yet noticed, I've been fighting actual failures today. The rest are believed resolved: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86_64-darwin11-self-mingw32/builds/9057: Improper 33-bit integer constant. Fixed in r174324. http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/cmake-clang-i686-msvc10/builds/1850 Improper use of StringRef causing errors when compiler is MSVC (fixed in r174328) http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/clang-i686-msys/builds/409: llvm-config reported an error, believed to be the result of incomplete configure step. 410 succeeded. http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-mi...

...veloperPolicy.html document I gathered I need to send a patch to this list (which I did); could you clarify if I misunderstood it? The second patch is really trivial and I think it's worth applying - it seems like a typo by someone who tested on MSVC 11 but not 10; or maybe my local instance of MSVC10 is somehow deficient, of course. The first patch is adding MSVC-specific __declspec(noinline) - that's the whole patch - so if someone experienced who has access to all the platforms LLVM compiles on could test it (and/or replace it with something cross-platform; or #ifdef it out everywhere non...

The tests have worked fine on Windows for a while now when building with an MSVC environment. As for the tests failing, what tests are failing for you? Can you pastebin the results? I have seen issues with MSVC11, but not MSVC10. Thanks! ~Aaron On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > Last time I checked, running the tests on Windows with MSVC was a PITA. The > test scripts still expect a UNIX-like environment, so a lot of tests fail. > If that has been...

...3.1 => main additions: forward enum, nullptr, range-based for. gcc 4.7, MSVC 11, clang 3.1 => main additions: override/final, template aliases. gcc 4.7, MSVC 11 nov' 12, clang 3.1 => main additions: initializer lists, variadic templates v1.0 [4]. Note: the only benefit of gcc 4.6 + MSVC10 over gcc 4.5 + MSVC10 is "nullptr". As we can see, if we are confident enough in the Windows buildbots to pick up the differences between the various versions (and I suppose we already rely on them), then the version proposed by Chris does provide a number of new C++11 features compared...

On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: >> Good points David, I don't feel qualified to evaluate the differences >> between those versions though... Perhaps Richard or Doug could comment here? > > Unless I'm misreading the buildbots, we don't actually have anything > trying to build with MSVC. Have we considered how

...erPolicy.html> document I gathered I need to send a patch to this list (which I did); could you clarify if I misunderstood it? The second patch is really trivial and I think it's worth applying - it seems like a typo by someone who tested on MSVC 11 but not 10; or maybe my local instance of MSVC10 is somehow deficient, of course. The first patch is adding MSVC-specific __declspec(noinline) - that's the whole patch - so if someone experienced who has access to all the platforms LLVM compiles on could test it (and/or replace it with something cross-platform; or #ifdef it out everywhere no...

On Jan 31, 2013, at 4:37 AM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > We'd like to promote the AArch64 backend to being built by default. I > know it's very soon after the initial upload, but we think the backend > is in a good position and should be stable. > > We'd very much like to get it tested in more diverse environments >

...Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>wrote: > The tests have worked fine on Windows for a while now when building > with an MSVC environment. As for the tests failing, what tests are > failing for you? Can you pastebin the results? I have seen issues > with MSVC11, but not MSVC10. > > Thanks! > > ~Aaron > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Justin Holewinski > <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > > Last time I checked, running the tests on Windows with MSVC was a PITA. > The > > test scripts still expect a UNIX-like environment...

Dirk, I am working on tests/win32(s) too. I can let all tests pass on msvc10 and cygming with my patches, thought, my patches are incomplete (several of them hide potential problems) Please see threads below in llvm-commits. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20100927/109077.html http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20101004/...

...nd blames to the llvm-testresults if his master (aka I) > knew he were mature. > > I don't also want him promoted and called as one of official > buildbots. He is my pet, though, I expect he should be helpful to the > developers. Is <http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/cmake-clang-i686-msvc10> our only MSVC builder? lab.llvm.org doesn't seem to have one. I think that it's valuable to have an MSVC builder around so we *nix folks don't inadvertently break things there. -- Sean Silva On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:04 PM, NAKAMURA Takumi <geek4civic at gmail.com> wrote: &...

Hi, sorry, in my last mail, I didn't check in time that HTML e-mails would be turned off. So, checking out llvm/clang yesterday under Win32, building it, and running the "check"-project using MS Visual Studio yielded 177 unexpected failures, many of which happen because of the different registers used in passing arguments under Win64 and everybody else on x86-64. I would be

...onballman.com> > wrote: >> >> The tests have worked fine on Windows for a while now when building >> with an MSVC environment. As for the tests failing, what tests are >> failing for you? Can you pastebin the results? I have seen issues >> with MSVC11, but not MSVC10. >> >> Thanks! >> >> ~Aaron >> >> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Justin Holewinski >> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: >> > Last time I checked, running the tests on Windows with MSVC was a PITA. >> > The >> > test...

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Sergiy Migdalskiy <migdalskiy at hotmail.com> wrote: > In order to get llvm to compile on Windows with MSVC 10, I have to disable > inline on utostr to avoid internal compiler failure, and disable _xgetbv > call in OsSupportsAVX because it's only defined in MSVC 2012 compiler. The > first patch (noinline) is known for many months now. I'm

Here is a trivial reason why I have not propagated http://bb.pgr.jp/ . Sometimes (but I suppose rarely) he reports false alarm in a few points. He'd send blames to the llvm-testresults if his master (aka I) knew he were mature. I don't also want him promoted and called as one of official buildbots. He is my pet, though, I expect he should be helpful to the developers. ...Takumi

In order to get llvm to compile on Windows with MSVC 10, I have to disable inline on utostr to avoid internal compiler failure, and disable _xgetbv call in OsSupportsAVX because it's only defined in MSVC 2012 compiler. The first patch (noinline) is known for many months now. I'm a casual llvm user, and don't know the proper channels to go through to submit a patch. Could someone tell

Last time I checked, running the tests on Windows with MSVC was a PITA. The test scripts still expect a UNIX-like environment, so a lot of tests fail. If that has been rectified, someone please let me know! I would imagine it should work much better with cygwin, or mingw with a bash shell and utils. On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Dmitry Babokin <babokin at gmail.com> wrote: >

Hello, I'm compiling llvm+clang (both are 3.2) on Windows using CMake + VS2010 (SP1). I have ALL_BUILD successfully passing, but "check-all" fails. Is it expected to pass? Is it expected to pass on Windows with any other toolchain? -Dmitry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi all, We'd like to promote the AArch64 backend to being built by default. I know it's very soon after the initial upload, but we think the backend is in a good position and should be stable. We'd very much like to get it tested in more diverse environments provided by the buildbots, and are committed to cleaning up any fallout as soon as possible, or as a last resort reverting the