search for: muwiinfa

...aid, last time I tried LLVM 2.7svn, TCO was broken in the JIT, at > least on x86_64. It works fine up to LLVM 2.6 for me, though.) > > 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

...9;t work on x86-64 with LLVM 2.2, since some parts of the LLVM JIT apparently contain non-relocatable code; I hope that this will be fixed in the forthcoming LLVM 2.3.) 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

...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: > 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 I noticed: > > - No 'make uninstall'. That is a real deal breaker if you

...eno, I think that you should post your suggested fix there. > > Who wrote the new llvm-config? Could the author please have a look at > this PR? > > -- > 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 > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > ------------...

...latforms 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

...g the sin(x) and cos(x) functions work though, only the ones included in > the main file don't. So I'm a bit puzzled... Did you link your executable with -rdynamic? -- 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

...er wrote: > Please review the 2.5 release notes here: http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html Here are two typos I noticed: s/improvmenets/improvements/ s/GFortan/GFortran/ -- 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

...ackward compatibility on x86_64. But given that llvmc is still considered experimental, better do it now than later. ;-) Thanks a lot for creating llvmc, it's very useful! -- 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, > The problem with using -fPIC on x86 is not only the speed of the > generated code, I also get JIT-related segfaults in the Pure interpreter > (on Linux). See, e.g.: Please fill a PR in the LLVM bugzilla, so this issue won't get lost. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

...(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 > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > ------------...

On Aug 25, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Albert Graef wrote: > Trunk (r80020): > raw_fd_ostream(const char *Filename, std::string &ErrorInfo, > unsigned Flags = 0); > > It would be helpful to emulate the LLVM 2.5 variant of the constructor > on both 2.6 and trunk, so that frontend developers don't have to code > against three different versions of the

...ssary autoconf magic to deal with this in my frontend. I just hoped that I might get rid of it in this case. All those #ifdef's don't make the code prettier. :) 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

Dear All, The LLVM 2.6 Release Branch doesn't compile for me on Mac OS X. The following patch seems to fix it (it adds a missing include file to get WeakVH defined). Has anyone else seen this breakage, or is it possible that I've got the wrong branch checked out? -- John T. Index: lib/Transforms/Scalar/DeadStoreElimination.cpp

...else seen this breakage, or is it possible that I've got the > wrong branch checked out? I fails to compile on Linux as well. Has been that way for a few days. 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

...Otherwise please keep the flag. (That said, last time I tried LLVM 2.7svn, TCO was broken in the JIT, at least on x86_64. It works fine up to LLVM 2.6 for me, though.) 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

...Cheng wrote: > I'll run -tailcallopt as x86 llcbeta to see if JIT is indeed broken. Jeffrey apparently fixed that now, I'm going to test against trunk asap. 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

...s x86 llcbeta to see if JIT is indeed broken. > > Jeffrey apparently fixed that now, I'm going to test against trunk asap. > > 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

I just upgraded HLVM from LLVM 2.7 to 2.8 and started seeing stack overflows so I think TCO isn't working. Have there been any obvious changes that would cause this? -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com

...ous changes that would > cause this? FWIW, Pure uses TCO as well and that works fine with LLVM 2.8, both with the JIT and with statically compiled code, at least on x86_64. -- 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