similar to: [LLVMdev] Fortran and LLVM

On 11/8/06, Warren Armstrong <warren.armstrong at anu.edu.au> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm looking into using LLVM to do some optimisations of > Fortran code. As part of this, I've been trying to build > the frontend with f95 support. At the moment, I'm trying > to resolve undefined symbol problems for code defined in > c-common.c + elsewhere - I'm taking

Dear LLVMers, Does anyone know what the latest is w.r.t a FORTRAN front-end for LLVM? Is anyone expecting to have typical f90/f95 programs compiling to LLVM this year, or next? (I'm aware of the "NAG hack" and various other f2c-type approaches, but they give me a strange feeling in my tummy.) Duraid

Hi, in a thread this afternoon about compiling the Fortran SPEC2000 to LLVM bytecode, Chris mentioned that it should be possible to compile to LLVM with the gfortran front end, although no one has necessarily tried it. I was surprised (and happy) to hear this, as under the impression that it would require a "complete rewrite of the gfortran backend" [1]. Now, I probably misinterpreted

On 25 Nov 2006, at 09:02, Reid Spencer wrote: > Anyone know what to do about this: > > make[4]: Leaving directory `/proj/llvm/llvm-test-1/External/SPEC/ > CFP2000/173.applu' > make[4]: Entering directory `/proj/llvm/llvm-test-1/External/SPEC/ > CFP2000/178.galgel' > /usr/bin/f95 -w -S -O2 /opt/spec/CPU2000v1.3.1/benchspec// > CFP2000/178.galgel/src/modules.f90

I just noticed this - I can't promise any particular amount of TLC, but I'll certainly be giving the Fortran front-end some attention as soon as LLVM moves to gcc 4.2. For future reference, does anyone know of a good free Fortran compiler test suite? Cheers, -mike On 5/14/07, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Duraid, > > > Does anyone know what the

Hi Duraid, > Does anyone know what the latest is w.r.t a FORTRAN front-end for > LLVM? Is anyone expecting to have typical f90/f95 programs compiling to > LLVM this year, or next? (I'm aware of the "NAG hack" and various other > f2c-type approaches, but they give me a strange feeling in my tummy.) support for Fortran will be much easier once LLVM rebases itself

Hello LLVM-people, I've been trying (on and off) to compile the _full_ SPEC CPU2000 benchmark suite to LLVM bytecode. The biggest problem I'm facing is the Fortran benchmarks, for which some partial support is already available it seems (using f2c). Unfortunately the f2c compiler only allows the translation of Fortran-77 programs to C code (which is then compiled using llvm-gcc).

Anyone know what to do about this: make[4]: Leaving directory `/proj/llvm/llvm-test-1/External/SPEC/CFP2000/173.applu' make[4]: Entering directory `/proj/llvm/llvm-test-1/External/SPEC/CFP2000/178.galgel' /usr/bin/f95 -w -S -O2 /opt/spec/CPU2000v1.3.1/benchspec//CFP2000/178.galgel/src/modules.f90 -o modules.c -fixed -kind=byte -dcfuns -dusty f95: unrecognized option '-kind=byte'

Hi Kenneth, On Sat, 2006-11-25 at 10:12 +0100, Kenneth Hoste wrote: > > > > ? > > > > This man page: > > http://www.die.net/doc/linux/man/man1/gfortran.1.html > > > > says there's no such option as -kind > > > > Do I need some special version of f95 to run the SPEC2K tests? > > If I'm correct, f95 has nothing to do with GCC. As

Hi Chris, > > I use NAG with llvm-gcc4. What sort of errors do you get? Did you > configure llvm-test with the appropriate flags to find it? > Yes, I did. llvm-test is configured as follows: (in /work/LLVM/1.8/ llvm/project/llvm-test): ./configure --with-spec2000=/work/SPEC_CPU2000_1.3_src/benchspec -- without-f2c --with-f95-bin=/work/NAG_f95/bin --with-f95-lib=/work/

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Kenneth Hoste wrote: > I've been trying (on and off) to compile the _full_ SPEC CPU2000 benchmark > suite to LLVM bytecode. The biggest problem > I'm facing is the Fortran benchmarks, for which some partial support is > already available it seems (using f2c). ok. > Unfortunately the f2c compiler only allows the translation of Fortran-77 >

Hello, Some problems were solved, new ones arised... Getting closer though... The fixes for the previous problems are at the bottom of this email, bug reports will be submitted when all problems are solved. +++ New/remaining problems +++ Currently, 9/26 benchmarks compile and run succesfully. One (fma3d) still has a f95 related problem (see below). The other 16 are divided into two groups:

On 9/1/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > > I wanted to know if I should submit patches with comments around them > > like the "APPLE LOCAL LLVM" ones that mark the LLVM-only changes to > > the tree. I'd like to make it as easy as possible to apply these, so > > let me know any rules I

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Kenneth Hoste wrote: > Some problems were solved, new ones arised... Getting closer though... > The fixes for the previous problems are at the bottom of this email, > bug reports will be submitted when all problems are solved. Kenneth, In general, I am more than happy to help people on this list. It is good for the community and I enjoy helping people be successful

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Kenneth Hoste wrote: >> I use NAG with llvm-gcc4. What sort of errors do you get? Did you >> configure llvm-test with the appropriate flags to find it? > Yes, I did. llvm-test is configured as follows: (in /work/LLVM/1.8/ > llvm/project/llvm-test): > ./configure --with-spec2000=/work/SPEC_CPU2000_1.3_src/benchspec -- > without-f2c

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > Hi, in a thread this afternoon about compiling the Fortran SPEC2000 to > LLVM bytecode, Chris mentioned that it should be possible to compile > to LLVM with the gfortran front end, although no one has necessarily > tried it. Yup. > I was surprised (and happy) to hear this, as under the impression that > it would require a

Hi, in trying to build an llvm-gfortran on linux from today's gcc4 SVN, I get the following link errors that didn't show up on OS X. This is also using LLVM CVS from this morning. They appear to mostly be related to CodeWarrior compatibility code, but a couple are less obvious. What's the best way to fix this? I'm stuck without my powerbook for at least three weeks and I'd

Hi, I have a first quick patch and a question. The patch links f951 with g++ when LLVM is enabled. It's at the end of this email. I wanted to know if I should submit patches with comments around them like the "APPLE LOCAL LLVM" ones that mark the LLVM-only changes to the tree. I'd like to make it as easy as possible to apply these, so let me know any rules I should be following.

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > Hi, I have a first quick patch and a question. The patch links f951 > with g++ when LLVM is enabled. It's at the end of this email. Thanks, applied! > I wanted to know if I should submit patches with comments around them > like the "APPLE LOCAL LLVM" ones that mark the LLVM-only changes to > the tree. I'd like to

On 31 Aug 2006, at 23:46, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Kenneth Hoste wrote: >> Bummer. I think I'll contact the NAG support for more info on >> this. Can you >> show me the content of your Makefile.nagfortran? > > It is identical to yours. > >> Also, it is possible to tell make only to compile benchmark X? How >> can I >>