search for: wallac

On 1 July 2015 at 11:34, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote: > Why do you say spin? You're dismissing all use-cases other than this very narrow one I'd (with my own spin) characterise as "Do What I Mean, I Can't Be Bothered To Get My Code Right". Fair enough, you're arguing in favour...

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Russell Wallace > <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote: >> What's the largest integer such that something like 'return ((a * b) / >> c) >> d' works correctly on all major platforms? > > Twice the size of a pointer, i.e. 64 bits on 32-bit platforms and 128 > bits on...

...m Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\VC\BIN\nmake.exe"' : return code '0x2' Stop. NMAKE : fatal error U1077: '"C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\VC\BIN\nmake.exe"' : return code '0x2' Stop. On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:58 AM, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com>wrote: > After some running some more tests, a weird addendum to this case: the > build also fails at the same place with the same error message if MinGW > isn't in the path. I'm not talking about MinGW instead of Microsoft C++, > it's j...

...anks! On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Artur Pilipenko < apilipenko at azulsystems.com> wrote: > Are you going to run some of the existing passes? Why can’t you just use > the returned change-made value from the passes? > > Artur > > > On 20 Dec 2015, at 15:43, Russell Wallace via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > I want to run a bunch of optimizations, iteratively, that is keep > running until things stop changing (to make sure all optimization > opportunities are taken). As far as I know, there is no way to copy a >...

I used the latest version from here: http://www.mls-software.com/opensshd.html On my other (Windows 10) machine (on which openssh works), I have cygwin installed, but if ssh was using cygwin, I wasn't aware of it. I just ran ssh from the command prompt. Wallace Forman 913-669-4453 On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 4:37 PM, ?ngel Gonz?lez <keisial at gmail.com> wrote: > On 29/06/16 21:36, Wallace Forman wrote: > > Hmm... Perhaps not. Is something like cygwin required for it to work? > > Where did you install OpenSSH from? > cygwin is an av...

...) not found On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > You seems to be using MSVC 2015 which I don't use yet, and /GUARDSYM seems > to be a new option added in MSVC 2015. I'll try to support that. > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:56 AM, Russell Wallace < > russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote: > >> C:\t>type a.c >> #include <stdio.h> >> >> int main() { >> puts("hello"); >> return 0; >> } >> >> C:\t>cl /c a.c >> Microsoft (R) C/C++ Optimizing Compiler...

Yes, that is what I was thinking. Should I report it as a bug? On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Russell Wallace" <russell.wallace at gmail.com> > > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > > Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:15:19 AM > > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] How to invoke simplifycfg from co...

...precated in favor of the gold plugin? On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > LTOCodeGenerator is used by the llvm-lto tool, which is a standalone > tool for doing LTO links. > > Teresa > > On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Russell Wallace > <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote: > > Following on from my last question, based on such information as I've > been > > able to find on Google, I get the impression llvm-link is effectively > > deprecated / not actively maintained, because the focus of whole-...

...swaps them back). That feels like its own bug, canonicalize and reassociate having different opinions of canonical order. Just saying. --paulr From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Artur Pilipenko via llvm-dev Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 9:11 AM To: Russell Wallace Cc: llvm-dev Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Hash of a module There is a caveat here. I was experimenting with something similar and found that this status is not always trustworthy. I fixed one bug in prune-eh. These is also a bug in reassociate pass. It returns true with no change made on the following...

After battling for days trying to figure out what was wrong with my iax.conf it was determined that I do not have any inkeys set on the digium server. Now whether that is something new or just in a few cases I am not sure. Messing around and reading on IRC and the mailing list I could get certain things to work and then break other things. Now I can dial a IAXTEL number, 800 number and FWD

...across a larger set of files. I would like to suggest revising the LLVM coding standard to place the “System #includes” first. MartinO From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of David Blaikie via llvm-dev Sent: 10 September 2015 16:33 To: Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] LLVM coding standards and order of includes On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:06 AM, Russell Wallace via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>...

...ithout changes) > 3) Override the getSymbolAddress method, have your implementation call the > base classes impl > (Make sure everything runs without changes) > 4) Add handling to map name->address for any custom functions you want. > > > > On 03/28/2016 09:18 PM, Russell Wallace wrote: > > True, I care more about how fast the code runs than how long it takes to > compile it. So if the symbolic approach enables better code generation, > that is a very significant advantage from my perspective. > > Is there any example code or documentation you can point t...

On 20 March 2010 16:42, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote: > With Microsoft C++ (Windows Vista, 32-bit): > > LLVM 2.7 compiles (via cmake) without a hitch. > > I can't test it with my own code yet, will need to port from 2.6 to 2.7 > first. > > I was going to try running Kaleidoscope...

...PM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Did your test include running llvm::verifyFunction(...) on the function in question? > I guess I should test this, but I would have thought this would catch the issue. > > Garrison > > On Feb 5, 2010, at 12:13, Russell Wallace wrote: > >> Fair enough. In that case, is there an elegant way to test whether a >> basic block already has a terminator instruction? >> >> (I can think of several ways to do it in the front-end, but all of >> them are fairly inelegant. The problem I'm trying t...

...nd the function with an explicit return statement', 'if the programmer did write an explicit return statement everything after it must be ignored' etc.) On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Kenneth Uildriks <kennethuil at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Russell Wallace > <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote: >> When I generate a simple function with a single basic block with two >> return instructions, I had expected that if it did anything at all, it >> would use the first one, but it actually seems to ignore the first one >> an...

...def _MSC_VER > #include <intrin.h> > #endif > When you rename clang-cl.exe to cl.exe, make sure it's in the same bin > directory as clang-cl.exe so that it can find it's resource directory with > these builtin headers. > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Russell Wallace < > russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I tried checking out the latest llvm/clang from SVN (as of a few hours >> ago) and compiling it (clang 3.6.1 doesn't compile 3.7 because it fails a >> version check, so I repeated the technique of compiling with Micros...

Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> writes: > Okay; it doesn't seem to build with cmake, though? > > C:\d\clang>\cmake-2.8.0-win32-x86\bin\cmake.exe c:\d\clang-2.7 > -- Building for: NMake Makefiles Follow the instructions for building clang: http://clang.llvm.org/get_starte...

...y, you really don't want to be using LLVM (or just about any > framework.) LLVM does not make a good first tier JIT. It's makes a great > high tier JIT, but if you really really care about compile time, it is not > the appropriate answer. > > On 03/28/2016 08:57 PM, Russell Wallace wrote: > > Ah! Okay then, so you are saying something substantive that I think I > disagree with, but that could be because there are relevant issues I don't > understand. > > My reasoning is, I've already got a pointer to the function I want the > generated code to ca...

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote: > Ah, okay, thanks. Is the same true of Clang? > Clang builds with MSVC, though to build something you have to have a 'gcc' in your path to build the assembly that is produced.

...eferring to as "link time". > > The way to think of MCJIT: generate object file, incrementally link, run > dynamic loader, but do it all in memory without round tripping through disk > or explicit files. > > Philip > > > > On Mar 28, 2016, at 7:25 PM, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Right, but when you say link time, the JIT compiler I'm writing works the > way openJDK or v8 do, it reads a script, JIT compiles it into memory and > runs the code in memory without ever writing anything to disk (an option >...