search for: pragmaomphandler

...ith all the additional supporting implementation for AST visiting, AST writing, AST reading, etc. Finally, CodeGen component of Clang (clangCodeGen.a) implements all the AST lowering routines. -. During the initialization of Clang compiler proper before processing a translation unit, a PragmaOmpHandler object is constructed before both Parser and Sema objects are constructed. Upon creation of PragmaOmpHandler, it is made to initialize all its members, and asked to call Preprocessor to get register all the OpenMP pragma directive?s names. Later, both Parser and Sema objects are made to...

Hi Eli, Attached is the next patch in the line. This patch (class_pragma_omp_handler_support.patch) contains the implementation of the class "class PragmaOmpHandler". I also attached the test case (openmp_syntax_test.c). This test case is actually to test the syntactically legal simple OpenMP constructs. However, we can *really* test it only after submitting the next two patches - one related to PragmaOmpHandler object construction and the another relat...

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com>wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Mahesha HS <mahesha.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello All, > > > > We would like to make a proposal to support OpenMP in CLANG. The goal of > > this effort is to provide support for syntax > > > > analysis (parsing), semantic

Hi Eli, Attached zipped file, named, "fopenmp_option_support.tar.gz" contains the first patch, along with relevant *test case*. This patch is to support the option "-fopenmp" option in Clang. Following files are changed in this patch. Please start going through this patch, and let me know comments. Meanwhile, I will prepare next patch.

On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Mahesha HS <mahesha.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >> On 10/13/2012 04:38 AM, Mahesha HS wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 5:14 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 10,