similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc 4.2 and gfortran

Anton, I didn't know that EQUIVALENCE is the only unsupported major Fortran feature, as this bug says. Can you give me an update on the status of the Fortran front-end and what the near-term goals are? I am getting more requests from academics doing HPC compilers and it would be useful to know where Fortran support stands. Other llvmdev'ers may be interested too. Thanks,

Hello, Jack. > the libgfortran directory. Thanks in advance for any > information as I am working on test fink packaging for > llvm-gcc42. The gfortran is more or less ok nowadays. There are few patches waiting in my queue, but I'll commit them soon. It seems, that llvm-gfortran can compile almost all SPEC and polyhedron (there are few known issues, though). Unfortunately, I

Hello, Jack > and these are currently at revision 45366. Are these the same sources that you > are using? I've just commited remaining gfortran patches, which were in my queue. So, last rev. seems to be 45366 > Lastly, are there any issues with running the gcc testsuite > within the llvm-gcc-4.2 directories that I should be aware of? I'm not aware about result of running

Vikram, > I didn't know that EQUIVALENCE is the only unsupported major Fortran > feature, as this bug says. Can you give me an update on the status of > the Fortran front-end and what the near-term goals are? Ok. I was going to post something soon after 2.2 release, but let's do it now. LLVM 2.2 will contain (as a part of llvm-gcc 4.2) a port of gfortran compiler to the LLVM

Anton, With regard to the gfortran test cases which don't fail on x86_64 Linux, these are the exact gfortran.log entries for them under i686 Darwin9... > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_12.f90 -O0 (internal compiler error) > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_12.f90 -O0 (test for excess errors) Executing on host:

Ashay, If I understand correctly, in hw.o you would have llvm bytecode, while linker expects regular object binary. Probably first you need to emit asm out of bytecode using llc? - D. 2011/9/12 Ashay Rane <ashay.rane at tacc.utexas.edu>: > Hello, > Sorry for the late reply. Using dragonegg worked well, thanks all! > Just as a note... I had to use llvm-ld during the link step

What exactly is the state of gfortran support for the llvm gcc 4.2 front-end in the svn? I built yesterday's llvm-gcc-4.2 branch on powerpc-apple-darwin9 with fortran included in the languages. The gfortran compiler appears to have been built but nothing seems to be compiled for the libgfortran directory. Thanks in advance for any information as I am working on test fink packaging for

I see. And what's the purpose for outputting bitcode into *.o and *.a files? Do you want to perform an LLVM pass on linking step? 2011/9/13 Ashay Rane <ashay.rane at tacc.utexas.edu>: > Hmm.. I didn't explain the problem completely last time. I am creating a > drop-in replacement for gcc and gfortran that runs an additional pass on the > bitcode before generating the native

Sorry, at what step do you need archive? llc emits binary, it does not perform any linking, thus it does not need anything except the input bytecode file. Then during linking you can link whatever archives of binaries you want. 2011/9/13 Ashay Rane <ashay.rane at tacc.utexas.edu>: > Thats correct. But using llc becomes a problem when I have archives (.a > files). I could, in theory,

No, I am running the LLVM pass at the compilation step. So by the time I reach the link step, the transformed bitcode has been generated. Ashay On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Dmitry N. Mikushin <maemarcus at gmail.com>wrote: > I see. And what's the purpose for outputting bitcode into *.o and *.a > files? Do you want to perform an LLVM pass on linking step? > > 2011/9/13

Hello, Sorry for the late reply. Using dragonegg worked well, thanks all! Just as a note... I had to use llvm-ld during the link step because gfortran could not link bitcode. Here's an example of the error shown when using gfortran instead of llvm-ld: $ ${GCC_4_5_0}/bin/gfortran hw.f -c -fplugin=${DRAGONEGG_PLUGIN}/dragonegg.so -o hw.o -flto -emit-llvm -S $ ${LLVM_2_9}/bin/opt -mem2reg hw.o

Thats correct. But using llc becomes a problem when I have archives (.a files). I could, in theory, extract its contents to a tempdir and then use llc and link but just wondering if there is a more elegant solution. Ashay On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Dmitry N. Mikushin <maemarcus at gmail.com>wrote: > Ashay, > > If I understand correctly, in hw.o you would have llvm

Hmm.. I didn't explain the problem completely last time. I am creating a drop-in replacement for gcc and gfortran that runs an additional pass on the bitcode before generating the native binary. Here's whats happening: If the source code compilation process builds a static library (.a archive file), I need a means to link the `.a' file statically into the application. So if the

The previously posted benchnarks for gcc vs llvm-gfortran had one mistake. I was actually had the gfortran for 4.3.1 installed instead of that from gcc 4.2.4. Below are the polyhedron benchmark results for all three compilers... gfortran 4.2.4 Benchmark Compile Executable Ave Run Number Estim Name (secs) (bytes) (secs) Repeats Err % --------- -------

I've benchmarked the llvm 2.3/llvm-gcc-4.2 release against the stock gfortran compiler from gcc 4.2.4 on a 2.33GHz MacBook Pro using the '-ffast-math -funroll-loops -msse3 -O3' optimization flags. llvm-gfortran Benchmark Compile Executable Ave Run Number Estim Name (secs) (bytes) (secs) Repeats Err % --------- ------- ---------- ------- -------

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

Roger, On 4 August 2019 at 06:48, Koenker, Roger W wrote: | I?d like to solicit some advice on a debugging problem I have in the quantreg package. | Kurt and Brian have reported to me that on Debian machines with gfortran 9 | | library(quantreg) | f = summary(rq(foodexp ~ income, data = engel, tau = 1:4/5)) | plot(f) | | fails because summary() produces bogus estimates of the coefficient

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.med.uc.edu> wrote: > The current llvm/llvm-gcc4.2 svn is now fixed with > respect to the extra warnings that were being emitted > by the gfortran compiler. The gfortran testsuite results > under Intel Darwin9 are appended below. Yay! Thanks for testing this out. > Native configuration is i686-apple-darwin9 >

Hello folks, I want to compile some fortran code to IR, but llvm-gfortran 4.2-2.9 does compile my fortran code. gfortran 4.2.1 fail with the same error. but gfortran 4.4.6 and ifort compiles fine. Attached is the file causing error. Error message is m_List.F90: In function 'exporttostring_': m_List.F90:925: error: conversion to non-scalar type requested I wonder if there any way I can

Roger, I have run gfortran -c -fsyntax-only -fimplicit-none -Wall -pedantic rqbr.f in the src folder of quantreg. There are many warnings about defined but not used labels. Also two errors such as "Symbol ?in? at (1) has no IMPLICIT type". And warnings such as: Warning: "Possible change of value in conversion from REAL(8) to INTEGER(4) at ..." No offense intended but