similar to: [LLVMdev] Newbie Enquiry

Yes, that's right! In fact, shortly the process of doing that will get easier with the llvmc (compiler driver) tool that I'm working on. You write your compiler to generate either bytecode or LLVM assembly and a configuration file. The rest of it (optimization, linking, codegen) can be done with existing LLVM tools. If you later want to include those features in your compiler, you can

Reid Spencer wrote: > Yes, that's right! > > In fact, shortly the process of doing that will get easier with the > llvmc (compiler driver) tool that I'm working on. [another newbie delurks] Hi, Reid. Been tinkering with LLVM about 2 weeks now. I've been using the Stacker Compiler as an example so far for my own little project. Is this tool you mentioned coming

Reid Spencer wrote: >Yes, that's right! > >In fact, shortly the process of doing that will get easier with the >llvmc (compiler driver) tool that I'm working on. You write your >compiler to generate either bytecode or LLVM assembly and a > > Does that mean the front end must decide between emiting bytecode for interpretting/JITing and LLVM assembly for native

Misha Brukman wrote: >On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 10:35:02AM +1200, Peter Ashford wrote: > > >>Does that mean the front end must decide between emiting bytecode for >>interpretting/JITing and LLVM assembly for native compilation? You >>can't emit the one kind of output for either end target (interpretted >>bytecode or native compilation)? >>

On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 10:35:02AM +1200, Peter Ashford wrote: > Does that mean the front end must decide between emiting bytecode for > interpretting/JITing and LLVM assembly for native compilation? You > can't emit the one kind of output for either end target (interpretted > bytecode or native compilation)? Not at all, there's only one version of LLVM IR, but it can

Hi, Where can I find the main function of llvm compiler in the source file? Thanks! -- Shuhan

On 7/25/05, Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: > I think that the answer is that llc is intended to be the final compiler > of executable output. Running "general" passes in llc was never part of > the design. It just runs machine passes, assuming that its bytecode > input is already optimized. OK, that makes sense. > What you're looking for is a program

shding at mtu.edu wrote: > Hi, > Where can I find the main function of llvm compiler in the source file? > Thanks! Well, there's a loaded question. :) It depends on "which" compiler you mean. If you're talking about the llvm-gcc and llvm-g++ compilers (C/C++ to LLVM) then they are in the downloadable tarballs available here: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/releases/. You

On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 21:48 -0700, Michael McCracken wrote: > On 7/25/05, Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: > > Why not just create your pass as a shared object and: > > > > opt -load mypass.so -mypass | llc > > My pass is an implementation of an analysis group that I wanted to > make available to machine passes as well as optimization passes. So I >

Thank you. I'm only consider about how the compiler comiles c program to LLVM IR. I know there should be a scanner, parser, and IR generator. But where is the main entrance and how about the flow of the process, especially about the IR generator? > shding at mtu.edu wrote: >> Hi, >> Where can I find the main function of llvm compiler in the source >> file? >>

Folks, As of the writing of this note, the llvmc tool is enabled for build on the CVS head. I'm encouraging you to try it out, provide some feedback, and help with the issues below. llvmc is now able to correctly link a pure bytecode version of any Stacker program. This includes translation with stkrc, optimization with opt and linking with llvm-link. It is also able to find Stacker's

Folks, I'm at the point in developing llvmc (Compiler Driver) where I need to get the details on the specific optimization arguments that the -O family of options should (by default) issue to "opt". I'm soliciting your feedback on this so I can start testing optimization. Hopefully you can provide it by early this coming week. For clarity, the -O options are currently defined

LLVM build without big problems in obj dir == src dir case (for example, last night tester build) But I have problem with building CVS version LLVM in obj dir != src dir case. ======= Finished building ModuleMaker debug executable (without symbols) ======= gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/home/wanderer/pkg/build/llvm/obj/examples/ModuleMaker' gmake[1]: Leaving directory

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91333 Bug ID: 91333 Summary: Connecting second of two monitors to a Lenovo W520 causes displays to go crazy Product: xorg Version: unspecified Hardware: Other OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium

Hi, I'm soliciting feedback on a design feature for llvm-ld, loadable linker optimization modules. The Problem: The llvm-ld tool expects that the bytecode files it is linking to already have been compile-time optimized appropriately. When it links all the bytecode together, it needs to apply link-time optimizations, if appropriate. The problem is, because of various front-ends involved,

Have just upgraded from 3.0.14a to 3.0.25b. On starting winbindd it puts the following in /var/log/messages: initialize_winbindd_cache: clearing cache and re-creating with version number 1 All the winbind UID/GID mappings are lost and it starts again from scratch. Hence all file ownership / ACLs on this samba server become invalid. Anyone else seen this? Why does it see fit to destroy this

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > I'm at the point in developing llvmc (Compiler Driver) where I need to > get the details on the specific optimization arguments that the -O > family of options should (by default) issue to "opt". I'm soliciting > your feedback on this so I can start testing optimization. Hopefully you > can provide it by early this coming

I resend email with updated (after mass header move) log examples. > LLVM build without big problems in obj dir == src dir case (for example, > last night tester build) > But I have problem with building CVS version LLVM in obj dir != src dir > case. > gmake[1]: Entering directory `/usr/home/wanderer/pkg/build/llvm/obj/projects' gmake[2]: Entering directory

I want to compute a new variable (newvar) based on the values of two other variables (t1freq, t2freq).The two variables (t1freq,t2freq) are contained in a dataframe - study1dat <- read.csv("c:\\study1rb.csv",header=T) . I gather this computation can be done using Apply and I have run the following example from the help menu ## Compute row and column sums for a matrix: x

Dear R-help, I am trying to estimate a Cox model with nested effects basing on the minimization of the overall AIC; I have two frailties terms, both gamma distributed. There is a error message (theta2 argument misses) and I don?t understand why. I would like to know what I have wrong. Thank you very much for your time. fitM7 <- coxph(Surv(lifespan,censured) ~ south + frailty(id,