similar to: [LLVMdev] Compiler Driver [high-level comments]

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 > >