similar to: [LLVMdev] Constants.cpp:368: error: `INT8_MAX' undeclared(firstuse this function)

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004, Henrik Bach wrote: > >There is currently support for building in non-cygwin windows environments > >protected by _MSC_VER. You just need to broaden the scope of the #ifndef > >to include internix. > > > > Sorry Chris, but my DataTypes.h.in seems to be outdated (due to I'm porting > LLVM 1.2), so I'm not at the moment able to edit the

>From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> >Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:49:01 -0500 (CDT) > >There is currently support for building in non-cygwin windows environments >protected by _MSC_VER. You just need to broaden the scope of the #ifndef >to include internix. > Sorry Chris, but my DataTypes.h.in seems to be outdated (due to I'm porting LLVM 1.2), so I'm not

>From: John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> >Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 09:11:03 -0500 > > >The DataTypes.h header file is generated by the configure script and placed >into your build tree. My best guess is that your system's header files do >not correctly define these macros, so they are missing. > I did a search on the build and source trees, but neither

>From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> >Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:49:01 -0500 (CDT) >The file you need to modify is here: >llvm/include/Support/DataTypes.h.in > >There is currently support for building in non-cygwin windows environments >protected by _MSC_VER. You just need to broaden the scope of the #ifndef >to include internix. > Sorry, Chris, but my

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:43:27 -0500 (CDT) > Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > Sorry! LLVM 1.3 will probably be out in a few weeks... > > Speaking of which, what are your intentions for 1.3? Are you waiting on CPR? > Anything else? We're starting to get some traction with more developers and > I think doing

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:43:27 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > Sorry! LLVM 1.3 will probably be out in a few weeks... Speaking of which, what are your intentions for 1.3? Are you waiting on CPR? Anything else? We're starting to get some traction with more developers and I think doing a release sooner rather than later might be worth it for all parties

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:57:20 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > CPR would be really nice. There is also this ephemeral PPC support that > may or may not make it, but would be really awesome it if did. I would > also like to turn on some sort of interprocedural alias analysis by > default (for performance). CPR might make it in the next couple of weeks.

Hi By manipulating a #define for G++ I've managed to compile int64_t type with ostream. Now, I'm stopped by some to me unknown constants: ----------------------------------- Compiling Constants.cpp Constants.cpp: In static member function `static bool llvm::ConstantSInt::isValueValidForType(const llvm::Type*, long long int)': Constants.cpp:368: error: `INT8_MAX' undeclared

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > > Another thing that is on my short list for 1.3 is to get as many .bc > > format changes out of the way as possible so the backwards compat code in > > the .bc reader is simpler. In particular, I would at least like to get > > placeholders for PR263 and maybe PR400. > > This I strongly agree with. We need to minimize impact

Hi again Does cygwin support shared libraries. And if not, how did you port llvm on this issue? /Henrik >From: "Henrik Bach" <henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com> >Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 00:41:53 +0200 > >Hi, > >I get this error: >------------------ >ToolRunner.cpp:396: error: `SHLIBEXT' undeclared (first use this function) >ToolRunner.cpp:396:

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > Personally I think that we've waited much too long for the 1.3 release, BTW, for those who are interested in the differences between 1.2 and CVS, check out: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#whatsnew Note that the release notes still need to be polished, but you'll get the basic idea. -Chris -- http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:05:21 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > BTW, for those who are interested in the differences between 1.2 and CVS, > check out: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#whatsnew It might be a good idea to add a check-in script that puts the latest version of the pending ReleaseNotes.html into the web site directory and then link

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:05:21 -0500 (CDT) > Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > > BTW, for those who are interested in the differences between 1.2 and CVS, > > check out: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#whatsnew > > It might be a good idea to add a check-in script that puts the latest >

Silly me. Perhaps then just a more prominent link on the main page with something like a "what's coming in the next release" label ? Reid. On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:16:33 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > That is exactly what the http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/ directory is: a > mirror of the docs directory in CVS. It's autoupdated on every

Hi John, Please see below, too >From: John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> >Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:57:02 -0500 > >Henrik Bach wrote: >>Hi, > >Please see below. > >> >>I get this error: >>------------------ >>ToolRunner.cpp:396: error: `SHLIBEXT' undeclared (first use this function) >>ToolRunner.cpp:396: error: (Each

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:19:11 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > This has no impact on the users at all... it has an impact on the > maintainers of the LLVM .bc file reader. :) The LLVM BC file reader has > to have compatibility code to support loading of all released LLVM > bytecode formats (1.0, 1.1, 1.2, etc). Good point. > There is always a

>From: Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> >Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:03:44 -0700 > >I just discovered that the *only* place this is used is in the debugger >when it is loading files, etc. There should be a way to do this without an >alarm. In fact, a thread could easily set the "ShouldShowStatus" every >second until the the thing is cancelled. Since the

Yes, Chris you're right. It seems that my << operator for int64_t is missing in my '/opt/gcc.3.3/include/c++/3.3/bits/ostream.tcc' file. Which ordinary version of GCC are you working with and how do your definition of the << operator for int64_t look like? /Henrik > >Here is an excerpt from the config.log for LLVM: > >configure:19451: checking for int64_t

Here is an excerpt from the config.log: configure:19451: checking for int64_t configure:19476: gcc -c -g -O2 conftest.c >&5 configure:19479: $? = 0 configure:19482: test -s conftest.o configure:19485: $? = 0 configure:19496: result: yes configure:19511: checking for uint64_t configure:19536: gcc -c -g -O2 conftest.c >&5 configure:19539: $? = 0 configure:19542: test -s conftest.o

Hi Guys I'm trying to port and build LLVM to the Interix environment. I've succeded until the Interix version of gcc program executes: gmake[1]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/llvm/lib/Support' gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/llvm/lib/Support' gmake[1]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/llvm/lib/Support' Compiling CommandLine.cpp CommandLine.cpp: In function