similar to: [LLVMdev] Is anyone working on an AMD64 port?

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

Hi, I get this error: --------------- configure: configuring in projects/Stacker configure: running /bin/sh '/C/projects/src/llvm-2/llvm/projects/Stacker/configure' --prefix=/C/LLVM/tools/ '--prefix=/C/LLVM/tools/' 'CPPFLAGS=-D__MINGW -DLLVM_ON_WIN32=1' --cache-file=/dev/null --srcdir=/C/projects/src/llvm-2/llvm/projects/Stacker configure: error: invalid variable

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

============================================================= Henrik Bach Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= Got Freedom? Software Freedom Day 2004 - 28th of August http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/ =============================================================

Hi Jeff, _HEAPOK is unknown to mingw 1.0 (which is the official release). Henrik. ============================================================= Henrik Bach Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= Got Freedom? Software Freedom Day 2004 - 28th of August http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/

Hi, This minor patch clarify matters in the CFEBuildInstrs.html file in my view. Henrik. ============================================================= Henrik Bach Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= Got Freedom? Software Freedom Day 2004 - 28th of August http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/

Uh... shouldn't a Win32 port use the Win32 API? On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 02:11:51 +0200 "Henrik Bach" <henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > Here is my first patches to the Win32 platform. > > They compile on the mingw platform. > > I haven't test them yet, but I thought it will best to put them in the save, > just in case... > >

Hi, Today I've succeded in compiling the llvm-tools, llvm-gcc and stacker frontend and in installing it. Uptill now I've followed the steps given in: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/CFEBuildInstrs.html with modifications for the mingw platform. I'll return with step-by-step instructions how to do it on this platform. Cheers Henrik :)

Hi Here is my first patches to the Win32 platform. They compile on the mingw platform. I haven't test them yet, but I thought it will best to put them in the save, just in case... /Henrik _________________________________________________________________ F� alle de nye og sjove ikoner med MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.dk/ -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and

Sorry, I forgot to give all you guys my credit, too. Without your help - especially from Jeff, Morten, Reid and Chris, to name a few, this wouldn't have succeded. Just for fun, I ran from a windows command prompt the fibinacci.exe with the argument of 10 and it returned 55. All in all, something lives. Great! :) >From: "Henrik Bach" Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 23:26:02 +0100

Well Chris, then I've to ask the guys who really have the hands into the guts of the VC++ code: On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Henrik Bach wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I'm reading release notes for the fifth public release of LLVM and came > across this line: > > "The LLVM source code is now compatible with Microsoft Visual C++." > > which is almost true, if

On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Henrik Bach wrote: > This tweak seems to work. > > As far as I can see, correct me if I'm wrong, it is the compiler, that can't > figure out which std::basic_ostream to use. Why? What I'm saying is that it appears that your implementation of operator<< is not functional or is missing. You said that you are using GCC on internix. Is it possible

Well, Henrik has a point. As of now, the only thing LLVM is good for when built with VS is the JIT engine, and then only if you're willing to write your own front end--or be satisfied computing fibonacci numbers :) That doesn't make it useless, of course, as Morten will testify, but the market for this level of functionality can't be big. I do plan on creating projects to build llc

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:

Hi >From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> >Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:43:27 -0500 (CDT) >Ah, suddenly everything makes sense. If you're interested in LLVM on the >windows platform, *please* get CVS. Last night I've got the latest version of LLVM from CVS and now porting LLVM to Interix from this version on. I got this error: --------------------- gmake[1]:

>From: Jeff Cohen <jeffc at jolt-lang.org> >Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:24:47 -0700 > > >But there are some issues with System I'm going to have to take care of >besides using Win32. There appears to be some Unix assumptions like the >presence of /etc or the HOME environment variable. Neither have any >true equivalent in Windows. > Will be fixed in a working

Hi Reid, Looking closer at the build process, I find that Path.cpp doesn't get compiled, even if it is a newer version than its *.o file. That's probaly the reason the error still exists. I've zipped and attached the trace after the point the new Path.cpp was updated by cvs. It clearly shows that it newer gets compiled and now shows that it is the dependencies in the makefile

No, Chris, I'm not buying that argument, due to I've tweaked /usr/include/types.h a little bit, so the configuration and compilation of the cfrontend would be correct: /* * 64bit type for BSD compatability */ #ifdef __GNUC__ typedef long long int quad_t; typedef unsigned long long int u_quad_t; typedef long long int int64_t; typedef unsigned long long int u_int64_t;

Hi Reid, Looking closer at the build process, I find that Path.cpp doesn't get compiled, even if it is a newer version than its *.o file. That's probaly the reason the error still exists. I've zipped and attached the trace after the point the new Path.cpp was updated by cvs. It clearly shows that it newer gets compiled and now shows that it is the dependencies in the makefile

Hi, Would some one be so kind to catch the output when configuring and building the CFE together with the log files produced? Thanks. Henrik. ============================================================= Henrik Bach Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= Got Freedom? Software Freedom Day 2004 - 28th of