similar to: [LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions

> > > Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, > > > some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have > > > strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! > > > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > > > Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C mean? > >

On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:23:06PM -0500, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > > > > > Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C mean? > > > > I dunno. Perhaps cause Misha liked it. But, you do have a point there. LLVMCC = LLVM Compiler Collection, a la GCC After all, it's going to be the

On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Misha Brukman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:23:06PM -0500, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > > > > > > > Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C mean? > > > > > > I dunno. Perhaps cause Misha liked it. But, you do have a point there. > > LLVMCC = LLVM

On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 15:03, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, > > > some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have > > > strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! > > > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > >

On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 17:31, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Misha Brukman wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:23:06PM -0500, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > > > > > > > > > Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C mean? > > > > > > > > I dunno.

> On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > > I actually like Misha's point here. Most people that have used GCC > > recently realize that the CC means "Compiler Collection" and not "C > > Compiler" which is appropriate given what it does. Since we intend to be > > front end language agnostic and the driver tool will support multiple > >

On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > I actually like Misha's point here. Most people that have used GCC > recently realize that the CC means "Compiler Collection" and not "C > Compiler" which is appropriate given what it does. Since we intend to be > front end language agnostic and the driver tool will support multiple > front end languages,

On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 18:04, Chris Lattner wrote: > What is the difference between a "compiler collection" and a "compiler"? > how about llvmcs "llvm-compiler system" or something else non-cc? :) The difference is that most people associate the word "compiler" with a single language: e.g. the C++ compiler, the Pascal compiler, the Fortran compiler.

> On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 06:05:16PM -0700, Reid Spencer wrote: > > On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 18:04, Chris Lattner wrote: > > llvmcd - llvm compiler driver > > llvmci - llvm compiler invoker > > llvmcs - llvm compiler system (or perhaps "compilation system") > > llvmct - llvm compiler tool > > llvmx - llvm eXecutive > > I like llvmcs. Contrary

LLVMers, Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! 1. Name = llvmcc 2. The config file format will resemble Microsoft .ini files (name=value in sections) 3. -O set of options will control what gets done and what kind of output is

On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 12:26:50PM -0500, Brian Gaeke wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 06:05:16PM -0700, Reid Spencer wrote: > > > On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 18:04, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > llvmcd - llvm compiler driver > > > llvmci - llvm compiler invoker > > > llvmcs - llvm compiler system (or perhaps "compilation system") > > > llvmct

Hi Reid, > Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, > some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have > strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! > > 1. Name = llvmcc I like llvmcc, but really have no strong opinion. > 2. The config file format will resemble Microsoft .ini files > (name=value in

Hi Bill, On Mon, 2004-08-02 at 21:31, Bill Wendling wrote: > Hi Reid, > > > Since there's been little feedback on the design document I sent out, > > some decisions are being made in order to progress the work. If you have > > strong feelings about any of these, voice them now! > > > > 1. Name = llvmcc > > I like llvmcc, but really have no strong

Dear All, I thought I would chime in with some ideas and opinions: o Configuration Files If it isn't too much trouble, I think we should go with XML for the following reasons: 1) We wouldn't need to implement a parsing library. There are several XML parsing libraries available, and I'm guessing that they're available in several different programming languages (Reid, am I

On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 11:30:45AM -0600, Feng Chen wrote: > However, although the configuration and installation process doesn't > report any error/warning, the llvmc cannot work. It just says: > Unexpected unknown exception occurred :( > > Do you have any clue about that? Have you compiled and installed llvm-gcc/llvm-g++? llvmc is not a compiler, it's just a compiler

I have not used llvmc to build ARM binaries, but llvm-gcc does work.There's a script to build llvm-gcc x86 -> ARM cross-compiler in llvm/utils/crosstool/ARM/ . 2009/6/29 Juan Carlos Martinez Santos <juanc.martinez.santos at gmail.com> > I am using the below configuration: > > ./configure --with-llvmgccdir=/home/jcmartin78/LLVM/llvm-gcc4.2 >

I am using the below configuration: ./configure --with-llvmgccdir=/home/jcmartin78/LLVM/llvm-gcc4.2 --prefix=/home/jcmartin78/local --enable-optimized=1 --enable-debug-runtime --enable-jit --enable-targets=arm --target=arm When I use LLVMC to compile a simple program I get this: $ llvmc hello.c llc: error auto-selecting target for module 'No available targets are compatible with this

Dear All, First, we're pushing back the creation of the release branch until tonight. This means two things: 1. If you want something to go into LLVM 1.5, you have until I create the release branch to get it in. I am tentatively scheduling this for 5:00 pm today (CST). 2. If you don't want something to go into LLVM 1.5, please refrain from adding it until I create the release

Actually, Misha, that won't work. The -C option is used directly in docs/Makefile. So the change will have to go into docs/Makefile. Either that or upgrade install to version 5. Reid. On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 11:33, Misha Brukman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 01:21:20PM -0600, Feng Chen wrote: > > llvm[1]: Installing HTML documentation > >

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Brian R. Gaeke wrote: > > I'm debating whether llvm should support the "a.out" convention for the > > default name of an executable file if no -o option is given to it. I'm > > currently of the mind that this naming convention is completely outdated > > and not worth propagating in llvmc. llvmc would require a -o option or > >