search for: spight

...ll; make install"-- each instruction of the form "either do this or else do this"; "either put these here or put them here" reduces the chance of a successful build for the newcomer. Anyway, congratulations on your success so far and I hope you continue to rock. Marshall Spight

Marshall Spight wrote: >>FYI, work progresses on the Win32 native port which you might also find >>interesting. It might even get done before the cygwin stuff. Jeff Cohen >>is working on that. Perhaps he can indicate the status of that effort. >> >> > >I recall reading on t...

...I just pretty please have those binaries? Some projects I've seen have a "download nightly build" section for the adventurous; mightn't you do the same? This would be hugely useful until there's a forehead-build (or better yet, forehead-install) for llvm on cygwin. Marshall Spight

...n reach that at http://illuvium.net/ FYI, work progresses on the Win32 native port which you might also find interesting. It might even get done before the cygwin stuff. Jeff Cohen is working on that. Perhaps he can indicate the status of that effort. Reid. On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 10:35, Marshall Spight wrote: > Hi, > > I'm looking into LLVM, and I must say it looks supremely cool. However, > I'm having a hard time getting anywhere with it, since I don't have a linux > machine here, and cygwin seems like a bit of a second-class citizen. > > The instructions to bu...

Hi, What's the state of llvm on various platforms? I've tried working with it on windows/cygwin a few times, and been fairly frustrated. I made some abortive efforts on RedHat 9, which also didn't go so well, but I put much less time into them. Is there a plan or a timeline to end up with some low-intensity linux target? Sort of like: grab these three RPMs and go. Having to get my

>> In other words, abandoning overflow detection makes the >> duplication of types redundant, while requiring it would be a >> great burden on CPUs that don't have overflow exception hardware. > >Yes, you're right. This has been a desired change for quite some time >now. Unfortunately, its a huge impact to nearly every part of LLVM. We >will

You know what I would really love? I set of pre-built llvm binaries. Either for Windows or RedHat. IIUC, the cygwin nightly build hasn't succeeded since March, and the latest download on illuvium.net predates that. I'd love to be able to try out 1.6, but having to build my own compiler to build it is a substantial barrier. I know there are binaries for the gcc frontend, which is cool, but

> I recently checked in the X86 support for tail calls. Hurray!!! And thank you. Marshall