search for: vc8

Hello, I've managed to get LLVM 1.8 to build properly with MSVC8 with some effort. Most of the changes necessary were very minor C++ usage issues; for instance, VC8 can't deal with prototyping something that's really a class as 'struct Foo;' or vice versa (it creates issues with matching function signatures during linking.) Additionally, I had to...

...ker/?func=detail&atid=411&aid=16211&group_id=85 Category: win32-service Group: Packaging Status: Closed Resolution: Rejected Priority: 3 Submitted By: Sorin Sbarnea (intersol) Assigned to: Daniel Berger (djberg96) Summary: win32-service will not install/build corectly if the system has VC8 Initial Comment: Currently ruby is compiled with VC6 and if someone does have VC8 installed the build will succeed but the extension will crash at load because incompatibilities between CTR. #case 1: --------------------------- ruby.exe - Unable To Locate Component --------------------------- Th...

Hi all! Does anyone successfully use the VC8/VS2005 command line tools (cl.exe and link.exe) with wine yet? I'm trying to setup VC8 in our cross compiling environment (which already works perfectly with VC7), but have some problems here. After some tries, I can now run cl.exe with wine to compile our sources (although some command line pa...

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 srhilber at ncsu.edu wrote: > I've managed to get LLVM 1.8 to build properly with MSVC8 with some > effort. Most of the changes necessary were very minor C++ usage issues; > for instance, VC8 can't deal with prototyping something that's really a > class as 'struct Foo;' or vice versa (it creates issues with matching > function signatures during linking.) C...

...n. 2) the ret instruction should be able to return structs (as Chris has already written on his page). 3) the EH could be done at code emission and would leave bytecodes portable. Each backend would emit code compatible (if possible) with the compiler it is compiled with; if llvm is compiled with VC8, it would emit code compatible with VC8. I will probably soon begin with development. Please let me know if there is any thing more I need to consider/know, or if there is someting wrong with the design. Also, any help (especially the thing with struct returns) would be very welcomed. In my opinio...

Hi all, With the latest 1.8.6 release out today, I was wondering - what would you all think of a Windows-only fork of Ruby? I mean Perl has ActiveState, right? It ships with a slightly different interpreter and different libraries, so why not Ruby? Here''s what I''m thinking: * Win2k or later. No 95/98/ME support. No cygwin/mingw, either. * Assume VC++ 8. Use whatever

Hey Daniel, I''m trying to leave you a comment on this article you wrote: http://djberg96.livejournal.com/168403.html But since you disabled OpenID and anonyous, I''m not fond to register for another account just to reply your comments. Quoting your post: "" Unfortunately, I''ve slammed into the cold hard fact that FFI just isn''t the grand solution

...ound quality is coherent with the bitrate effectively used) >From what we have found to date it's look like it's related to rounding error from float to int conversion but it's just an impression we have not pin pointed the exact problem. We tried out different compilation option on VC8 to reproduce the behaviour of VC71, but without success. So we don't know if it's a Microsoft bug or if the problem is on the side of vorbis lib or on our side. But what we are sure is that we send the same encoding parameter to both version of the encoder. Presently we use libvorbis 1.0,...

...structs (as Chris has > already written on his page). This won't help C++ or C. > 3) the EH could be done at code emission and would leave bytecodes > portable. Each backend would emit code compatible (if possible) with the > compiler it is compiled with; if llvm is compiled with VC8, it would emit > code compatible with VC8. I agree for unwind tables, this is what the invoke/unwind abstraction are for. For RTTI, there is nothing the compiler can do to shield you from front-end dependencies. -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/

...on. 2) the ret instruction should be able to return structs (as Chris has already written on his page) 3) the EH could be done at code emission and would leave bytecodes portable. Each backend would emit code compatible (if possible) with the compiler it is compiled with; if llvm is compiled with VC8, it would emit code compatible with VC8. I will probably soon begin with development. Please let me know if there is any thing more I need to consider/know, or if there is someting wrong with the design. Regards, Žiga

...hread.new { while true puts "printing a line" sleep 2 end } gets t.exit puts "exiting" As you see, the idea is get multiple "printing a line" until a hit enter. The thing is this is a known problem for 1.8 on win32. I tried both mingw, VC6 and VC8 with the same results. Saw a post from Park Heesob patching this in 2003... but for 1.8.1. Should the new WinRuby propose a solution for this? :-D Just droping a new bomb on the battle field :-) In the meantime, there is a non-accepted patch for this? Park? Thanks in advance, -- Luis Lavena...

Hi all, I've been following LLVM for a couple of years, and though I've not found an occasion to use it (yet), I'm always curious about its potential uses. I was discussing with friends about the Cell processor, and some of the arguments were that it is difficult to program and difficult to optimize. One of the concerns was that the PPE (central processor) is "in

All, Mongrel 1.1.3 Rails 2.0.2 Ruby 1.8.6 Windows XP SP2 When I issue the command "ruby script/server" from any of my Rails projects on v. 2.0.2, I get a Windows dialog with the error: "The application has failed to start because MSVCR80.dll was not found. Re-installing the application may fix this problem." I''ve gone through the process of attempting to introduce

Hi, Have you tried the new VC8 Beta? It's been out for less than 2 weeks: http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/visualc/default.aspx It's supposed to have improved standards compliance. Regards, -Eugene Talagrand On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 01:56:03 -0500 (CDT) > From: Ch...

...ng this issue because I really need this feature in llvm for my project. > >> 3) the EH could be done at code emission and would leave bytecodes >> portable. Each backend would emit code compatible (if possible) with the >> compiler it is compiled with; if llvm is compiled with VC8, it would >> emit >> code compatible with VC8. > > I agree for unwind tables, this is what the invoke/unwind abstraction > are for. For RTTI, there is nothing the compiler can do to shield you > from front-end dependencies. > > -Chris > > --------------------...

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Jay Freeman (saurik) <saurik at saurik.com>wrote: > gcc is correct. According to the ISO specification, the for-init-statement > is supposed to inject any variable names into the same declarative scope as > the condition of an equivalent restructuring of the loop in the form of a > while statement, which in turn fronts the declaration to an extra

It looks like fastthread was rolled into 1.8.6: http://svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/tags/v1_8_6/NEWS?revision=12055&view=markup Does that mean once we upgrade to 186 we can forget about rubygem version? - Rob

>From: Paolo Invernizzi <arathorn at fastwebnet.it> >Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 11:18:00 +0200 >If VC6 is not doing something wrong with templates... ;-/ As far as I know is template handling a part of some C++ ISO standard. Then, MS should adhere to this... However, what you objects against is that MS didn't implement STL the way STL should be implemented. And the reason to

> Also, I'd like to suggest adding the following to config.h, to > eliminate the spurious deprecation warnings: > > #define _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS > #define _SCL_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS > #define _CRT_NONSTDC_NO_WARNINGS > > > And moving #include "llvm/Config/config.h" in all the files above any > > other includes, so those will have the proper effect.

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > Sorry, but it is not even close to working (its template and STL support > > is horribly lacking). The Visual Studio "Whidbey" compiler, now in beta, > > will handle it though with only a reasonable amount of tweaking to the > > LLVM sources. I have no idea about when Microsoft intends to release it > > though,