similar to: [LLVMdev] (no subject)

On Sep 5, 2005, at 10:21 AM, Andrew Lenharth wrote: > On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 14:45 +0800, Tzu-Chien Chiu wrote: > >> why there is no general dependency analysis for the "machin code"? >> perhaps it's because the instruction scheduling is only implemented >> for sparcv9? >> > > Most backends use the SelectionDAG infastructure to do this kind of >

On Oct 15, 2009, at 10:45 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > Unfortunately, we found out at the last minute that Apple has a rule > which prevents its engineers from giving video taped talks or > distributing slides. We will hold onto the video and slide assets in > case this rule changes in the future. > > -Chris Chris, I hope you can pass my message along to the people at Apple

I too am disappointed that not all talk slides are posted. To me it speaks poorly of the whole meeting since there were parallel sessions and not everyone could attend in person all the sessions they wanted to. The slides are, I thought, meant to be like the "proceedings" and If I recall some of the Apple slides are present from previous years but not this year. Vinod On Sat, Oct 17,

Our department outreach coordinator spotted this and forwarded it to me. It's a lot of speculation but I thought many of you would be interested. --Vikram http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/~vadve http://llvm.org Begin forwarded message: > From: "Jennifer C La Montagne" <jsandone at uiuc.edu> > Date: June 8, 2007 12:53:00 PM CDT > To: "Vikram Sadanand Adve"

That sounds like a problem. Just so I understand, do you mean there isn't the run-time support etc. to write back ends for the C++ language, or that the compiler IR is also somehow insufficient to write a code generator? --Vikram Associate Professor, Computer Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://llvm.org/~vadve On Jul 11, 2009, at 3:00 PM, Granville Barnett

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Sean Peisert wrote: > libraries due to inline assembly. Do my assumptions seem correct? yes > Has an OS (or at least the sytem applications on it) ever been > compiled with LLVM? I'm not aware of anyone who has built a whole os with LLVM yet, e.g. due to inline asm issues. However, many system utils (e.g. finger and core utils) have been built with LLVM.

When you create a parser via ANTLR you specify the output language of the resulting recursive descent parser, at the moment there exists no C++ output template to my knowledge, thus you would have to generate the parser as C code for which a template exists. The runtime support should be there, at least partially but it won't use things like exceptions, nor will it have a very modular design

First, kudos on the ThinLTO results reported in your blog post — they’re impressive and the system sounds really well engineered. I’m starting to try it out on a large piece of software and I’d like to make sure I know what to expect. The blog said it will be available in clang-3.9 but both clang-3.8 and trunk seem to have some degree of support for it. What is the status of ThinLTO in 3.8

We are looking for an open source C++ parser other than g++ if possible. Clang would be great but its C++ support is still some way away and we need something that works or nearly works now. Does anyone have any experience with ANTLR for parsing C++ and for extending their C++ parser? Any other feedback on ANTLR in general would be welcome too. Thanks, --Vikram Associate Professor,

Thanks, Chris. > > I'm having a bit of difficulty using LLVM to compile system programs > > (e.g. rsh) on FreeBSD 5.x. > There are three basic options here: > > 1. Build all your code with LLVM. > 2. Build the non-llvm parts into a dynamic library, and use "lli -load > x.so <other options>" to load it. > 3. Link the non-llvm parts into LLI.

On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 14:45 +0800, Tzu-Chien Chiu wrote: > why there is no general dependency analysis for the "machin code"? > perhaps it's because the instruction scheduling is only implemented > for sparcv9? Most backends use the SelectionDAG infastructure to do this kind of thing. (Simplifying things a bit) Each basic block is selected to a DAG based IR. Then

> On Jul 22, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Vikram, > > Thanks! > > I'm not sure what part got committed in the 3.8 timeframe - it looks like that was released back in March? 3.8 was branched in early January though. It has some of the work-in-progress for ThinLTO, it “could” work in simple cases I

why there is no general dependency analysis for the "machin code"? perhaps it's because the instruction scheduling is only implemented for sparcv9? i am going to implement a dependency analysis pass for machine code block. the result will be returned in a boost graph (http://www.boost.org/libs/graph/doc/table_of_contents.html). just to check if it has already been implemented. it

I've done extensive research on the subject and if you want to parse ALL of C++, there are only two options, g++ or the Edison Design Group C++ front-end. Both of these have projects designed to make this easier LLVM (as you know) and Rose (http://www.rosecompiler.org/), which works with the EDG compiler. AspectC++, OpenC++, Antler, TLX, all work with only a portion of the grammer. On Sat,

Hi, I've not got any experience using ANTLR to parse C++, however, you will find that there only exists a C code generator for ANTLR and NOT a C++ one. Over the years numerous people have requested a C++ code generation template but alas there is still only a C one. Just a heads up. Granville 2009/7/11 Vikram S. Adve <vadve at cs.uiuc.edu> > We are looking for an open source C++

Dear Prof. Adve, I recently checked out the llvm using cvs update command under the llvm directory. But when I went to see the DSNode.h, there is no getPointerSize function. I checked the doxygen tree, it's there. So that means I didn't update my cvs tree correctly. Could you let me know how to update my CVS tree? Or there is a problem at somewhere else? Thanks, xiaodong On Sun, 10 Nov

Sparc is a popular target for architecture simulators, and removing that back end would force people using such simulators to use some other compiler infrastructure. Sparc is also useful for University courses. I'd strongly discourage removing this back end. --Vikram Professor, Computer Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://llvm.org/~vadve On Oct 25, 2011, at 4:00

Hi Mehdi, Yes, we did see your earlier post. Efficient (de)serialization is definitely important for both exporting (a la LTO and ThinLTO) and for shipping code as IR. I expect most use cases of the latter would benefit. -—Vikram // Vikram S. Adve // Professor, Department of Computer Science // University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign // vadve at illinois.edu<mailto:vadve at

Hi Vikram, It is a bit more that just “efficient (de)serialization” as there is some amount of tradeoff to make between “size” vs “speed” vs “flexibility” (which are all some sort of “efficient”). For instance what if we get a faster deserialization but got larger size? That might be an issue for some people who’d like to ship bitcode. Another thing is that we may get better speed/size by

I'm trying to decide whether to use either the MIPS or ARM back ends for course projects in our introductory compiler class. I'd like to use something that has a stable back end, so that the students can use the selector, probably without changes, and do a project on register allocation and stack layout. We don't have MIPS or ARM hardware (other than possibly a few donated Android