similar to: [LLVMdev] compiling clang with a obj/ dir

On Sat, 14 Jul 2007, Holger Schurig wrote: > I can compile LLVM using with this method: > > svn co ... > cd llvm > ./configure ... > make > > or with that one: > > svn co ... > mkdir obj > cd obj > ../llvm/configure ... > make > > > How does the second method work with the new, experimental C > compiler, "clang" ? The doc said that

I can compile LLVM using with this method: svn co ... cd llvm ./configure ... make or with that one: svn co ... mkdir obj cd obj ../llvm/configure ... make How does the second method work with the new, experimental C compiler, "clang" ? The doc said that you put the clang sourcecode into llvm/tools/clang, change into this directory and simply enter "make". This seems

Hi Holger, On Thursday 19 July 2007 12:57:40 Holger Schurig wrote: > > LLVM represents debug info as explicit calls to intrinsics. > > This approach has many advantages, but a possible disadvantage > > is that it can significantly increase the size of the bitcode. > > I don't know if that explains your observations. I'm curious > > to know how gcc stores

Hi Holger, On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 09:28 +0200, Holger Schurig wrote: > /usr/src/llvm/llvm$ make > make: Warning: File `/dev/null' has modification time 4.9e+03 s > in the future > make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/llvm/llvm/lib/System' > ... > > At the end of the compilation it emits something about clock skew > detected. > > The time of

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Holger Schurig wrote: >> if the programmer is going to tell you that the memory pointed >> to by a pointer argument is never written. > > There are ways to cast away a const. You don't even need casts: void foo(const int *P, int *Q) { x = *P; *Q = 1; y = *P // redundant? } void bar() { int X = 0; foo(&X, &X); } -Chris --

Tomas, Please file a bug for this. Attach the .o files and command line in question. Thanks, Reid. On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 23:22 +0200, Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote: > I think I have experienced this when more than one module contains > definitions for the same values. ie. it should only be a declaration > in one of them. > > On 8/15/07, Holger Schurig <hs4233 at

On Aug 16, 2007, at 9:09 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Holger Schurig wrote: >>> if the programmer is going to tell you that the memory pointed >>> to by a pointer argument is never written. If you use a const * __restrict pointer then you should get the benefit of this as the alias analysis will assume that the pointed to object is neither aliased nor

On Jul 18, 2007, at 8:06 AM, Holger Schurig wrote: > Seems like the memory-hog status is related to debug info, e.g. to -g. Perhaps this is related to the binutils bug discussed on the list recently (in certain versions of 2.17, I believe) that causes the native linker to behave very poorly when linking with debug symbols? http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2007-June/009391.html

I think I have experienced this when more than one module contains definitions for the same values. ie. it should only be a declaration in one of them. On 8/15/07, Holger Schurig <hs4233 at mail.mn-solutions.de> wrote: > I'm using llvm-ld from SVN r41106 > > When issueing the command > > $ /usr/src/llvm/installed/bin/llvm-ld -v -stats -native -O1 -strip-all -o main \ >

Holger, I have just committed a patch to cause the linker to properly propagate error messages from the LinkModules method up to higher levels of the linker. With this change it should tell you with more detail what is going on (why it couldn't link the file in). Please update, rebuild and try again. If you think the error message is wrong after that, please file a bug for this. To get

fucking hell, listserv... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Wilfred L. Guerin" <wilfredguerin at gmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:54:46 -0500 Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Segment Register Use To: Holger Schurig <hs4233 at mail.mn-solutions.de> I was very much expecting this style of response ;) I believe the following characteristics and class of example should

Hi all ! We have 3 NTBAs which are all going to our existing PBX. Our areacode is 06003 and our DDI enabled number 9141. I want to exchange that PBX with Asterisk, but still struggle to get it working. My CAPI.CONF is currently like this: [general] nationalprefix=0 internationalprefix=00 rxgain=0.800000 txgain=0.800000 [interfaces] context=in-capi msn=60039141 incomingmsn=* controller=1

Hi Holger, On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 09:02 +0200, Holger Schurig wrote: > Hi Raid ! > > I used llvm-top at home and in the company and I basically I like > it. Thanks for trying it out! :) > Here are some comments: > > - the README.txt says that all routines use a common library > and therefore accept a common set of arguments. But this > is confusing, because

Hello anybody, I have a Suse 7.2 Linux with Kernel 2.4.9, which is compiled by myself, and is running stable. Now I try to patch my sourcecode in the way you write on your homepage. But thier are two Proglems: 1. When I download the the file "ext3-2.4-0.9.6-249.gz" with my Windows, I get no packedfile, I get a Textfile?! -so gunzip would not work. 2. never the less, I tried to patch

Holger Schurig wrote: [snip] > ../../../../llvm-gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/istream.cc:495: internal compiler > error: Segmentation fault I encountered the same error and the nice people from the llvm irc-channel suggested the attached patch. It enables compiling llvm-gcc for me, but i have not yet done any further testing and i also have no idea if this is the right way to fix the problem.

On Aug 24, 2007, at 1:45 PM, Holger Schurig wrote: > In the gray block below "Example of link time optimization" there are > some source files and then a list of commands to execute: > > $ llvm-gcc4 --emit-llvm -c a.c -o a.o > $ llvm-gcc4 -c main.c -o main.o > $ llvm-gcc4 a.o main.o -o main > > 1) in current LLVM (e.g. llvm itself, cfe, llvm-gcc-4.0) no binary

Thanks for this informations. Do you know where I can find the icd-snmp package for a redhat 9 distri? I can't find it. Thanks. Message: 6 Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 15:45:57 +0200 From: Andrea Fino <af@faino.org> To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] SNMP Monitoring Reply-To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Holger Schurig wrote: >>You could try

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Holger Schurig <holgerschurig at gmail.com>wrote: > > Clang C++ only gets one big coming-out party (ever); a little > > more time will make a big difference. > > Hmm, wouldn't that speak against jamming this into 2.7 ? Let 2.7 > go out and don't bark at it's C++ status. That gives you a full > release-cycle to get C++

Hi, On Wednesday 18 June 2008 15:08:46 Edd Barrett wrote: > Holger Schurig wrote: > >> With 3.3.5 my first test took 5 times to produce a non "bus > >> error" build. There were no 'make cleans' in between. > >> > >> What is going on? > > > > You mean you used your bsd-ports-provided gcc to compile LLVM and > > you've

Mike, Holger, thanks for the tips, but being a long-time subversion user, I already knew this all :-) The problem was that I did an SVN merge from branch to trunk, and I ended up with: ... M include/llvm/User.h A + include/llvm/OperandTraits.h M include/llvm/Instruction.h ... The little "+" after the "A" means, the file got copied unchanged, and I think this is