similar to: [LLVMdev] Oversight group for LLVM

Hi OG, I think it first of all would be nice, if we could supplement this group with a discussion list on this topic. The reason for this isn't to ad more bureacracy, but to present public ideas and visions to a broader forum and I belive in that the more elaboration within a broader forum the better the ideas will get and the more people will get committed to start and finish the task.

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Henrik Bach wrote: > I think it first of all would be nice, if we could supplement this group with > a discussion list on this topic. The reason for this isn't to ad more > bureacracy, but to present public ideas and visions to a broader forum and I > belive in that the more elaboration within a broader forum the better the > ideas will get and the more

Hi Folks Please review this link: http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.mspx#EKAA As I see it, no one should use code copied from Microsoft directly, unless you are explicitly sure it is for private or non-commercial use or a permission is specifically granted for the purpose. And for that matter, no one can be sure if you rewrite code, not to infringe patents - as they adhere to

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

All, A draft of the LLVM Developer Policy document has been committed. This is something the Oversight Group has been working on for quite a while now. It defines policies regarding copyright, licensing, communication, quality, testing, patches, commit access, etc. We developed this so that everyone can be on the same page with respect to these policies. You can read it on-line here:

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;

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

On: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:27:02 -0500, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote: > I STILL do not understand why anyone would care what CentOS does > with money donated by people who used the product and wanted to > donate. > > If we were having wild beer parties every week ... as long as the > packages are built, compared, signed, and released on time, what >

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 :)

On Sep 14, 2010, at 12:09 PM, Gabor Greif wrote: > I see strangeness on Thumb TST (tTST) predicate 'isCompare' > > It is true for regular ARM, false for Thumb: > > (gdb) p MI->dump() > TSTri %reg16397, 3, pred:14, pred:%reg0, %CPSR<imp-def>; GPR:% > reg16397 > $24 = void > (gdb) p MI->getDesc().isCompare() > $25 = true > > > (gdb)

On Nov 28, 2015 2:51 AM, "Ady via Syslinux" <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: > > From: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> > > > > The System V ABI for x86-64 specify that a "red zone" is an area of 128 bytes > > above the current stack frame. This area can be used by a called function in > > order to avoid the overhead of

Hi, So, I owe you all an apology. I was totally unaware that the llvm.org server, running at UIUC, was still in operation and hosting an active LNT instance. I was under the assumption the LNT server ran elsewhere. As a result, the ability for the LNT bots to submit run information to the "old" LNT server is now gone. I am very sorry for this oversight. In speaking with Chris

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

Hi, I''ve just installed 0.22.2 and believe I''ve discovered a bug (or oversight). I have an exec like this: exec { "change-to-local-mirror": command => "sed -i ''s#\(KERNEL_REPO.*=\).*#\1 $mirror#'' ${rulefile}", path => "/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/bin",

Hey Nico, I'm actually not sure where the configurations for that bot are stored. I suspect Duncan may have a better idea. I'm reasonably certain that the missing +x is just an oversight. -Chris > On May 30, 2019, at 6:24 PM, Nico Weber via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Vedant or Chris: Ping :) > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 7:56 AM Nico Weber

I see strangeness on Thumb TST (tTST) predicate 'isCompare' It is true for regular ARM, false for Thumb: (gdb) p MI->dump() TSTri %reg16397, 3, pred:14, pred:%reg0, %CPSR<imp-def>; GPR:% reg16397 $24 = void (gdb) p MI->getDesc().isCompare() $25 = true (gdb) p MI->dump() tTST %reg16396, %reg16397, pred:14, pred:%reg0, %CPSR<imp-def>; tGPR:%reg16396,16397

Probably this job: lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage2-coverage-R/ 💬 from 📱 > On May 31, 2019, at 3:35 PM, Duncan Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > +Chris Matthews, do you know where the configs are stored for this? > >> On 2019 May 31, at 12:39, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: >> >> Hey Nico, >> >> I'm

Hi, Having finally gotten around to installing R-2.9.0, I find that while the docs still say I can invoke the --no-latex option, R CMD INSTALL has decided that I can't. Nor is there any notice of this that I can find in the 2.9 series news. Is this just a trifling oversight that will be repaired? Jim

Dear LLVM users, The development of LLVM has been supported primarily by funding from the National Science Foundation and the University of Illinois. in order to maintain our sources of funding and attract new ones, It is important for us to be able to document how LLVM is benefiting companies, universities, other organizations, and individuals in the outside world. (The information

So I was looking at the type reference, and noticed that for a lot of the types, no namevar was listed. When I checked the types in the code, for each of those omissions, the namevar was simply "name". Now, it might be self evident that this is the case, but a little documentation couldn''t hurt, If not in each type, at least in the section where it describes what namevars