similar to: [LLVMdev] Using LLVM to target the JVM

Mips2Java solves the same problem. The latest version of Mips2Java is called NestedVM and is part of the larger Vexi project. Much work has been done on NestedVM and it is quite impressive. http://wiki.vexi.org/ Still, it could use a lot of improvement. It's biggest immediate problems are: 1) It doesn't integrate well into a standard (Ant-based) Java build 2) There is no documented

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Curt Cox wrote: > Mips2Java solves the same problem. The latest version of Mips2Java is called > NestedVM and is part of the larger Vexi project. Much work has been done on > NestedVM and it is quite impressive. > http://wiki.vexi.org/ Interesting, do you know of any documentation that describes how this works? Does it just map the memory image for the mips

On Feb 28, 2005, at 19:16, Curt Cox wrote: > I'm interested in using LLVM to run source languages supported by GCC > (mostly just C and Fortran, actually) on a JVM. There seem to be two > general ways this could be accomplished. Here is a better way to do this. At least, I think it is better, mostly because someone else has already done all the work: http://www.xwt.org/mips2java/

On Mar 1, 2005, at 12:13, Chris Lattner wrote: > Interesting, do you know of any documentation that describes how this > works? Does it just map the memory image for the mips program onto a > giant array of bytes? int32 values, actually. The best documentation I have found is the description of mips2java. It seems to be down, so I've included a link via google's cache

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Evan Jones wrote: > On Mar 1, 2005, at 12:13, Chris Lattner wrote: >> Interesting, do you know of any documentation that describes how this >> works? Does it just map the memory image for the mips program onto a giant >> array of bytes? > > int32 values, actually. The best documentation I have found is the > description of mips2java. It seems

The reasons I'm interested in are compiling legacy Fortran/C code to Java bytecode are: 1) to run the same binaries on all platforms with a supported JVM 2) to run in environments with security restrictions (AKA sandboxes) I care about performance. A major reason that I'm attracted to LLVM is that it would seem to have a better upper limit for attainable performance. My primary

My idea was to create a complete backend treating Java as a normal platform, to enable LLVM to compile programs to Java Bytecode (.class) and Java Archive files (.jar). This could be useful in situations where we need to compile a program for a platform still not natively supported by LLVM. I don't know if it exists already, I've heard about this "LLJVM" but I don't think it

Hi all ;-) , I tried to install "Microsoft Java Virtual Machine" on Wine, but it showed me this error message! (jvm-1.png), after end of installation i tried to run a program using MS JVM, then wine appeared this error message (jvm-2.png) note: I tried to install "SUN Java Virtual Machine (JRE)" it worked well, but MS JVM didn't work! -- Best Regards

On Sunday 29 November 2009 02:06:04 you wrote: > > So it will stack overflow on tail calls > > At the moment, yes. But then again, so does java. Sure but a lot of people like me are using LLVM precisely because it offers these wonderful features. As long as your JVM backend does not handle these features correctly its utility is greatly diminished. > Also, it looks like

Source: xen Version: 4.0.1~rc5-1 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS User: debian-sparc at lists.debian.org Usertags: sparc Hi, your package no longer builds on sparc: | make[1]: Leaving directory `/build/buildd-sivp_0.5.2-2-sparc-3aHxSt/sivp-0.5.2' | SCI_DISABLE_TK=1 SCI_JAVA_ENABLE_HEADLESS=1 DOCBOOK_ROOT=/usr/share/sgml/docbook/stylesheet/xsl/nwalsh \ | /usr/bin/scilab -nw -f

Dear all, first of all I apologize for not having changed the object. I just re-used an old email I sent some time ago. The let us go into the question. Our architecture is the following: A (set of) java programs running under a jvm that passes data and instructions to an R instance via RNI and at the end of the process extracts calculated data from R. The question is: can I

Sorry if I'm repeating something that was already said. I was just thinking "why the heck do I seem headed for JVM generation if what I want to use is LLVM", and this is the result: I'm coming from a Java background. I'm using Eclipse, I'm used to the syntax highlighting, cross referencing and refactoring support that Eclipse offers. I know I will want to have the

> So it will stack overflow on tail calls At the moment, yes. But then again, so does java. Also, it looks like they're working on support for tail calls in the Da Vinci Machine[1]. > and break with run-time errors When I said it raises an assertion, I meant at compile-time. > on structs? No, structs are supported. The only unsupported types at the moment (as far as I am aware) are

Hi, I installed the jre-7u2 into the wine under Ubuntu 11.10 But, when I try to run the java itself: Code: wine ${PATH_TO_JAVA/BIN}/java.exe I get following error: Code: fixme:heap:HeapSetInformation (nil) 1 (nil) 0 Error occurred during initialization of VM java/io/IOException: Bad pathname Any hints? Help will be mostly appreciated, I need to run windows app, which uses JVM. Thanks.

i chose to install tomcat during the OS install as well as java....however, since I needed to use a different jvm, i used the method described in http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/JavaOnCentOS for Sun jdk 1.5.0_13 and it worked fine as I can tell, as using the alternatives --config java command, i see both 1.4.2 and 1.5.0 versions and choosing the 1.5.0 version yields the right version when doing a

Hello, David First of all, thanks for the backend submission. I let Chris comment about the procedure of adding it to the tree. :) I just did a quick look into the code. The comments are below > Indirect function calls don't work yet, and there's probably some > minor bugs in it, but it works well for the test cases that I've run > through it. Could you please provide some

I've been running a lot of apps with Sun's 1.5.0_03 JVM on CentOS 3.6. After the latest kernel update 2.4.21-37.0.1.ELsmp is seems I'm starting to get hangs. Just like I used to a year ago on an earlier kernel release. It looks like the infamous futex bug: strace -p 22406 Process 22406 attached - interrupt to quit futex(0x821be34, FUTEX_WAIT, 15, NULL <unfinished ...> Anyone

Hi, I've written a backend for LLVM that allows LLVM IR to be transformed to a Java/JVM class file (llvm-jvm.patch.gz attached). Indirect function calls don't work yet, and there's probably some minor bugs in it, but it works well for the test cases that I've run through it. Also, several instructions are emulated by method calls due to deficiencies in the JVM instruction set

> How do you handle tail calls and value types? I haven't worried too much about optimisation yet, so it doesn't do anything special for tail calls (although neither does the java compiler). LLVM types are translated to their equivalent java primitive type (or currently it raises an assertion if there is no equivalent type). -- David Roberts http://da.vidr.cc/ On Sat, Nov 28, 2009

>> Additional patch attached, is this suitable? > Looks good, thanks. What's about arithmetics? Revised patch attached. -- David Roberts http://da.vidr.cc/ On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 17:08, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote: > Hello, David > >> Additional patch attached, is this suitable? > Looks good, thanks. What's about arithmetics?