Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] llvm+gentoo=OK"
2005 Mar 21
1
[LLVMdev] llvm+gentoo=OK
This was the default version I got from public cvs last week.
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 03:44:19 -0600 (CST), Chris Lattner
<sabre at nondot.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Valery Khamenya wrote:
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > maybe it is of interest for someone:
> > I successfully compiled llvm and gcc front-end sources at Gentoo Linux
> > (even on exotic
2005 Mar 21
0
[LLVMdev] llvm+gentoo=OK
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Valery Khamenya wrote:
> Hi all
>
> maybe it is of interest for someone:
> I successfully compiled llvm and gcc front-end sources at Gentoo Linux
> (even on exotic x86-compatible CPU). Things seem to be running OK.
>
> This is a good prerequisite for making llvm ebuild script and promote llvm
> to hackers of fast-growing progressive Gentoo world.
2005 Apr 20
0
[LLVMdev] Gentoo ebuild of LLVM
Hi guys,
there are few issues concerning LLVM and Gento Linux below.
1. Gentoo encourages to think of smarter packaging.
Oversimplified, but...
there are at least three audiences using LLVM:
- application users
- developers *using* LLVM in their projects
- developers *changing* LLVM sources.
Application users are not interested in LLVM, they are rather
interested to have their favorite
2010 Sep 14
0
[LLVMdev] Any experiemnts/evaluations on LLVM and graph rewriting (term-rewriting) systems?
Hi Valery
On 13 September 2010 19:07, Valery Khamenya <khamenya at gmail.com> wrote:
> are there any attempts to use LLVM in graph-rewriting (term-rewriting)
> language implementations?
I've added a new LLVM backend to the ghc Haskell compiler.
> How good is LLVM for this?
Works very well. I'm operating from the low levels of the ghc compiler
though where I don't
2010 Sep 13
4
[LLVMdev] Any experiemnts/evaluations on LLVM and graph rewriting (term-rewriting) systems?
Hi,
are there any attempts to use LLVM in graph-rewriting (term-rewriting)
language implementations?
How good is LLVM for this?
E.g., is it natural to expect that the LLVM-based implementation of the
language Concurrent Clean be any faster than its reference implementation?
Best regards
--
Valery A.Khamenya
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
2004 Aug 17
4
[LLVMdev] compilation error after updated from cvs:
Building PowerPC.td register information header with tblgen
Included from PowerPC.td:22:
Parsing PowerPCInstrInfo.td:53: Variable not defined: 'GPRC'!
make[3]: *** [PowerPCGenRegisterInfo.h.inc] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/pool/tmp/ssrc/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC'
maybe I just have to "make clean" and/or ./configure
BTW, would it be nice to put Depend, Release and
2003 Dec 06
2
[LLVMdev] llvm, cvs, access
Hi all,
web-browser access to cvs is of course nice, but
is it possible to provide anonymous read-only access to llvm cvs?
(it would be nice to have an ability just download last sources)
P.S. BTW, this and previous my post were actually motivated by
desire to find some simple example on JIT usage :)
---
Valery A.Khamenya
2004 Aug 08
3
[LLVMdev] API on JIT, code snippets
Hi all,
I think there is still too few docs/samples for those,
who'd like to write JIT-based interpreters.
Today, the real examples to learn from are rather:
- lli.cpp
- ModuleMaker.cpp
- Stacker
which is still unfortunatelly not that much
about JITing :(
Well, what I am going to sell:
What about very small JIT-based example similar
to ModuleMaker?
I mean example, where, say, two
2003 Sep 06
2
[LLVMdev] languages, semantic trees, LLVM interfaces
Hello LLVM fathers,
1. "languages, semantic trees"
what do you think ideally, do languages implementations based on
LLVM need internal semantic tree or they should rather try to use
LLVM directly in/after syntax parsing?
For languages like C++ the expected answer is "of course we need
an internal semantic tree between parsing and LLVM!"
But I am still
2003 Oct 26
2
[LLVMdev] redhat 9, compiling llvm-1.0.tar.gz
Hi all,
compilation of package llvm-1.0.tar.gz under redhat 9 is failed with following output:
-------
make[3]: *** No rule to make target `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/runtime/GCCLibraries/crtend/BytecodeObj/C++-Exception.bc', needed by `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/lib/BytecodeLibs/libcrtend.bc'. Stop.
make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/runtime/GCCLibraries/crtend'
...skipped
-------
2008 Mar 17
2
[LLVMdev] LLVM has entered the google trends!
Hi all
see $subj
http://www.google.com/trends?q=llvm
congrats!
P.S. sorry if known.
best regards
--
Valery A.Khamenya
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20080318/2bfc6887/attachment.html>
2004 Jan 07
2
[LLVMdev] 9 Ideas To Better Support Source Language Developers
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Valery A.Khamenya wrote:
> Hello Reid and LLVMers,
> 10. Basic support for distributed computations.
What kind of support? What do you think should be included in LLVM
directly, as opposed to being built on top of it?
-Chris
--
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/
http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/Projects/
2004 Apr 07
2
[LLVMdev] LLVM and OpenC++
Hi OpenC++ developers,
IMHO, the LLVM project (http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/) could give
a second breath to OpenC++ project. Indeed, the implementations
of reflection become quite restricted if the just-in-time (JIT)
compiling is not available.
Am i wrong?
---
Valery A.Khamenya
2004 Aug 12
1
[LLVMdev] I got problem in BranchInst+SetCondInst
Hi all,
the small test modeling my problem is attached.
(see comments in file attached)
the problem is that both
SetCondInst* CondInst
= new SetCondInst( Instruction::SetLE, One, Two );
and
SetCondInst* CondInst
= new SetCondInst( Instruction::SetLE, Two, One );
have the same output...
Anyone have a sharper eye?..
---
Valery A.Khamenya
-------------- next part
2004 Aug 17
0
[LLVMdev] JIT API example (fibonacci)
Valery,
That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs
repository? I'd be happy to put it in.
Reid.
Valery A.Khamenya wrote:
> Hi LLVMers,
>
> the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible
> optimizations are really invoked.
>
> Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3
>
2007 Apr 10
6
[LLVMdev] LLVM Roadmap 2007-2008, PowerPC, multithreading, LLVM 2.0, etc ?
Hi,
where could one find any LLVM development roadmap for this
and perhaps next year?
Especially would be interesting to know about
* planned features for PS3 Cell processor -- as well as for Wii, Xbox360 CPUs
* multithreading in general
* possibly coming changes in major versioning and related issues
* other interesting featuring
comments on current status to above listed items are also
2004 Aug 17
5
[LLVMdev] JIT API example (fibonacci)
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote:
> That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs
> repository? I'd be happy to put it in.
Here's an idea: how about we take the ModuleMaker, Valery's previous
example, and this one and put them all in one "small examples" project?
-Chris
> Valery A.Khamenya wrote:
>
>
2004 Mar 17
2
[LLVMdev] JFYI: svn 1.0.1 released
Hi all,
Here:
http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2003-October/000523.html
Chris wrote:
Chris> We certainly acknowledge that CVS has severe
Chris> deficiencies, but in the near future we'll probably stay with it.
Chris> Perhaps after SVN 1.0 comes out... :)
so, now it is:
http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ProjectNewsList
;-)
P.S. any March LLVM news?
best
2001 Mar 20
3
help:too slow
here is a script I use to make overlapping cut of my input "col.dat"
file into a matrix:
#----------------------------------
col2mat<-function(x, sampsz=220, qsamp=2000) {
m<-matrix(nr=qsamp, nc=sampsz)
for(s in 1:qsamp){
print(s)
for(i in 1:sampsz){
m[s,i] <- x[s+i,1]
}
}
m
}
w<-read.table("col.dat", check.names=FALSE)
m<-col2mat(w)
2004 Aug 17
0
[LLVMdev] JIT API example (fibonacci)
On second thought, the makefiles don't (easily) allow this do they? You can
only build one program per directory. Were you suggesting that you wanted me to
move the entire directories under a "small examples" directory?
Reid.
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote:
>
>
>>That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this