similar to: [LLVMdev] MSIL

Hello (again)! I fixed most of the system and the following projects compile now: * Analysis * AsmParser * Bytecode * CBeckend * Codegen * ExecutionEngine * Support * System * TableGen * Target * Transforms * VMCore I would like to compile at least x86 target as well as Fibonacci example (to test if it really works). In order to do so, I may need some hints: 1) How to generate

Hello, everyone! My name is Žiga Osolin and I am one of administrators of baadengine project (www.baadengine.org). It is an open source, BSD-licenced, game engine. We are very interested in llvm to provide us runtime code generation (basically, wrappers to easily call scripts from C++ and vica-versa, via vtbl (we replace vtbl for scripted types)) and also to allow our VM to run on llvm. Our

Hello all. is it possible to use LLVM to optimize existing .NET assemblies? Basically doing the following: - read in MSIL and convert into LLVM internal representation - perform global optimizations on LLVM internal representation - write out optimized MSIL using the existing LLVM backend I presume that the capability to convert MSIL into LLVM internal representation exists somewhere in VMKit.

Hello! I have a question how about JIT-ed code and the C++ compiler compatibily. My project (www.baadengine.org) will use llvm and we will provide integration of JIT-ed code directly into C++ code. This means that C++ code can call JIT code just like any other code and JIT-ed code can call C++ code. We will compile to your bytecode from our BSF format. The question is if it is possible this

Dear Rudiger, Rüdiger Klaehn wrote: > Hello all. > > is it possible to use LLVM to optimize existing .NET assemblies? > It's in theory possible. LLVM+VMKit already does it for Java classes. > Basically doing the following: > > - read in MSIL and convert into LLVM internal representation > - perform global optimizations on LLVM internal representation > - write

> On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: >> The other thing are the return types. I don't know (it is probably even >> not documented) how VC++ returns smart pointer (boost::smart_ptr), >> or any other type (other basics types, such as int, float, ... are >> probably returned into EAX as with GCC). Once again, we may >> need specific return values

Chris Lattner pravi: > On Tue, 21 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: >> I was going through documentation and source lately, and I decided >> how to >> make llvm bytecode more compatible to C++: >> 1) thiscall sould be introduced, which would take N arguments and the >> first argument would always be the C++ "this" argument. This would >>

On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: > The other thing are the return types. I don't know (it is probably even > not documented) how VC++ returns smart pointer (boost::smart_ptr), > or any other type (other basics types, such as int, float, ... are > probably returned into EAX as with GCC). Once again, we may > need specific return values per arhitecture. It is

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: >> Sure. Anton can give you ideas for this. >> > I think it should not be too difficult because you allow custom call > conversions and this is quite easy to add, we only have to garantee that > the backend will emit it. Right. >>> 2) the ret instruction should be able to return structs (as Chris has >>>

On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: > The problem is this is not possible, because what I would compile to JIT > are actual classes. The integration of C++ and JIT code is very > important; for example we would create our own vtbls with JIT-ed code > addresses as the function call target. Ok. Realize that this ties you to a specific compiler version though. >

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Jeff Cohen wrote: > I'm confused. A MSIL front end I can understand, but a back end? How > will it be used? The GCC-based front ends that come with LLVM generate > bytecodes that have dependencies on the GCC runtime, which is not going > to be present in a .NET environment. Who said the input has to come through the GCC front-ends? Perhaps this is for

Chris Lattner pravi: > On Tue, 21 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: >>> Sure. Anton can give you ideas for this. >>> >> I think it should not be too difficult because you allow custom call >> conversions and this is quite easy to add, we only have to garantee that >> the backend will emit it. > > Right. > >>>> 2) the ret

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: > I was going through documentation and source lately, and I decided how to > make llvm bytecode more compatible to C++: > 1) thiscall sould be introduced, which would take N arguments and the > first argument would always be the C++ "this" argument. This would > abstract llvm compiler dependant C++ code emittion. Sure.

Hey there, Searching via the web is not producing answers.... So I thought I would ask the gods of llvm. :-) I'd like to experiment with the llc in conjunction with msil. but I am running into this error: llc-mp-2.9 test.ll -march=msil /opt/local/libexec/llvm-2.9/bin/llc: error: invalid target 'msil'. the version string is: llc-mp-2.9 --version Low Level Virtual Machine

Hello, > As for the state of the MSIL backend of LLVM, I don't think it's for > production use yet. Assemblies have lots of information in them and > maintaining them during the MSIL -> LLVM -> MSIL translations should be > the hard part. This should be pretty hard. MSIL is definitely much more high level than LLVM, that's why significant portion of information will

Chris Lattner pravi: > On Sat, 18 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: >> I am currently trying to make EH (exception handling) possible to be >> integrated in C++. This means that C++ code can throw exceptions and >> llvm code can catch such exception and llvm can throw exceptions that >> C++ can catch (or pass through). There are quite some difficulties with

Hi Artur, Artur Pietrek wrote: > Hello, > > I work in Kalray (Montbonnot, France) and I'm PhD student at Universite > Joseph Fourier in Grenoble. > We want to use LLVM framework for MSIL code generation, which is part of > my thesis. > Currently I'm still reading LLVM's documentation and I've started > completing the MSIL backend for running on Mono.

Hello, I work in Kalray (Montbonnot, France) and I'm PhD student at Universite Joseph Fourier in Grenoble. We want to use LLVM framework for MSIL code generation, which is part of my thesis. Currently I'm still reading LLVM's documentation and I've started completing the MSIL backend for running on Mono. Things that need to be fixed include pointers initialization, call to

Hello, Jeff. > I'm confused. A MSIL front end I can understand, but a back end? How > will it be used? The GCC-based front ends that come with LLVM generate > bytecodes that have dependencies on the GCC runtime, which is not going > to be present in a .NET environment. Well. It's LLVM-to-MSIL translator. So, if the source use some unsupported code... The same situation

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006, [ISO-8859-2] Žiga Osolin wrote: > I am currently trying to make EH (exception handling) possible to be > integrated in C++. This means that C++ code can throw exceptions and > llvm code can catch such exception and llvm can throw exceptions that > C++ can catch (or pass through). There are quite some difficulties with > approach: Cool! This is the major