Displaying 20 results from an estimated 6000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]"
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]
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
2004 Aug 03
2
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote:
> 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!
> > >
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]
Chris Lattner wrote:
} > I tend to agree. I'm a strong advocate of XML myself (on other
} > projects). However, introducing XML would make LLVM dependent on some
} > kind of XML parser. We could probably get away with expat (small, fast)
} > for our purposes in LLVM, but there is still the issue of dependency. To
}
} To me, it's not a matter of "one more
2004 Aug 03
3
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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.
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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,
2004 Aug 03
2
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
> 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
2004 Aug 03
4
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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.
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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
2004 Jul 08
3
[LLVMdev] Visual C++ Toolkit
Hi all,
I just wanted to know if anyone's looked into using the free version of
Microsoft's Visual C++ toolkit for LLVM:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/
-bw
--
|| "If wishes and buts were clusters of nuts, we'd all have a bowl of
|| granola!" - Mr. Jellineck
2004 Aug 03
2
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]
On Tue, 3 Aug 2004, Bill Wendling wrote:
> I admit a bias here: I've worked with MS style INI files. They didn't
> leave a good impression with me. However, they do fit the bill for a lot
> of applications. What do you envision a typical INI file to look like?
I was thinking of something simple like this:
[.c]
compile = cc1 %in -o %out
optimize = gccas %in -o %out.bc
link
2004 Aug 03
2
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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
2004 Aug 03
4
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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
>
> Why not 'llvmc' "llvm compiler"? What does the extra C
2004 Apr 26
1
[LLVMdev] Multiple Returns
Hi all,
Quick question: What is the best way to have multiple return values from
a function? Would that be placing these into a structure and returning
that to the caller?
Thanks.
-bw
--
|| "If wishes and buts were clusters of nuts, we'd all have a bowl of
|| granola!" - Mr. Jellineck
2004 Sep 02
0
[LLVMdev] Type uint64_t required but not found
Henrik Bach wrote:
} Hi John,
}
} configure still exits, when checking for uint64_t. I've attached a patch,
} that properly will fix it. Either uint64_t or u_int64_t will succeed:
}
} Index: configure.ac
} ===================================================================
} RCS file: /var/cvs/llvm/llvm/autoconf/configure.ac,v
} retrieving revision 1.106
} diff -u -r1.106 configure.ac
} ---
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]
I have a very simple XML document type that I use for configuring XPS
systems. There's only four elements and it follows much the same kind of
grouped name/value pairs that Chris is suggesting. Chris' example would
be like:
<configuration name="llvm">
<group name=".c">
<item name="compile">cc1 %in -o %out</item>
<item
2004 Mar 26
2
[LLVMdev] Extending LLVM
Hi all,
I had a quick question. I think it's possible to do this, but just
wanted to make sure.
It is possible to extend LLVM to add, say, matrix operations at a higher
level and then "lower" them into some version of LLVM "proper" after
performing any transformations on them, right? Also, it's possible to
have any custom-made types (like "matrix") as well?
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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 to the IRC discussion, I am not sure I want a
2004 Jul 30
4
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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
2004 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] Compiler Driver Decisions
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
> >