Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM"
2007 Dec 21
0
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
On 12/21/07, Richard Pennington <rich at pennware.com> wrote:
> I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple
> driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think
> it works).
Er. Hm. Can you explain the name? The problem with names like
"ellsif" is that it sounds like "else if". I like the
2007 Dec 23
3
[LLVMdev] Odd problem with command line options
I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most
of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target
code generation.
All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run:
[~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions -O5
<premain>: CommandLine Error: Argument 'machine-licm' defined more than
once!
2008 May 30
0
[LLVMdev] Odd problem with command line options
> I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most
> of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target
> code generation.
>
> All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run:
> [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions
> -O5
> <premain>: CommandLine Error: Argument
2007 Dec 21
1
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
>> Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file
>> Phase: Preprocessing
>> test/ofmt.i is ignored during this phase
>>
>
> What preprocessor are you using? Taras has already found one that is
> working for him and that is licensed under BSD and that has some
> features in it that he needs for source to source transformation. I
> would like us to all
2007 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
On Dec 21, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
> I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple
> driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think
> it works).
>
> The file being compiled is a "printf" function. Here are timing
> results
> for optimized and unoptimized runs:
Cool, this is
2007 Dec 22
5
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
>
>> I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple
>> driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think
>> it works).
>>
>> The file being compiled is a "printf" function. Here are timing
>> results
2007 Dec 21
0
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
I would really like to avoid shipping multiple preprocessors as part
of the standard elsa/oink project.
On 12/21/07, Taras Glek <tglek at mozilla.com> wrote:
>
> >> Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file
> >> Phase: Preprocessing
> >> test/ofmt.i is ignored during this phase
> >>
> >
> > What preprocessor are you using? Taras has
2008 Jul 06
2
[LLVMdev] Odd problem with command line options
Jay Foad wrote:
>> I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most
>> of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target
>> code generation.
>>
>> All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run:
>> [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions
>> -O5
>>
2008 May 14
3
[LLVMdev] Help needed after hiatus
Hi,
I've restarted my Elsa/LLVM project after three months of having real
life intrude. I upgraded my LLVM source to the current trunk. I had to
make a few changes to my source, e.g. LLVMFoldingBuilder became
IRBuilder and several instances of "new" became "Create".
Now, a test case that previously succeeded fails. I run the following
script:
#!/bin/sh
if [ 1 -ne 0 ]
2007 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
> I've build gcc many times over the years for different target processors
> and was never able to get my head around it internally. It is incredibly
> complex. I also didn't like the fact that I had to have N copies of gcc
> to support N processors.
Scott McPeak is rather familiar with the internals of gcc and edg and
says elsa is far simpler.
> I became interested in
2007 Dec 23
1
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
Daniel Wilkerson wrote:
>> I've build gcc many times over the years for different target processors
>> and was never able to get my head around it internally. It is incredibly
>> complex. I also didn't like the fact that I had to have N copies of gcc
>> to support N processors.
>
> Scott McPeak is rather familiar with the internals of gcc and edg and
>
2007 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
On Dec 22, 2007, at 2:40 AM, Richard Pennington wrote:
> Does Elsa provide an advantage over g++? For me, understanding it is a
> big plus. ;-) In addition, Elsa has a Berkeley-like license which I
> prefer.
Ok. If you're not planning on extending the front-end,
understandability doesn't really matter ;-). I get where you're
coming from though!
> Since I only
2007 Dec 23
1
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Dec 22, 2007, at 2:40 AM, Richard Pennington wrote:
>
>> Does Elsa provide an advantage over g++? For me, understanding it is a
>> big plus. ;-) In addition, Elsa has a Berkeley-like license which I
>> prefer.
>
> Ok. If you're not planning on extending the front-end,
> understandability doesn't really matter ;-). I get
2007 Dec 15
2
[LLVMdev] Elsa and LLVM and LLVM submissions
Hi,
I've been writing an Elsa to LLVM interface.
It has been going very well, I think both sets of software are very nice.
At this point I've been able to compile and run a small program (sieve.c).
I've also compiled a pretty complete version of printf(). (It seemed like
a good choice because it touches many data types, varargs, etc.)
I've had to make quite a few changes to Elsa
2007 Sep 18
0
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
Hi,
LLVM 2.1-pre1 test results:
Linux (SUSE) on x86 (P4)
Release mode, but with assertions enabled
LLVM srcdir == objdir
# of expected passes 2250
# of expected failures 5
I ran the llvm-test suite on my desktop while I was also working on that PC,
so don't put too much trust in the timing info. Especially during the "spiff"
test the machine was swapping
2007 Dec 08
0
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Elsa and LLVM
Wow! Cool!
Hey, if you sign my contributor agreement, we can consider making your
Elsa/LLVM compiler an Oink tool. Scott's intention is for Elsa to be
basically "done": that is, aside from bug fixes, it shouldn't have
more features. Oink is basically a bucket into which to throw tools
like this one that use Elsa as a front-end.
Daniel
On Dec 7, 2007 6:37 AM, Richard
2007 Dec 17
2
[LLVMdev] Elsa and LLVM and LLVM submissions
Devang Patel wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
>
>> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and modified my
>> code to
>> use the LLVMFoldingBuilder. Very nice!
>>
>> My question is this: I noticed that the folding builder doesn't fold
>> some
>> operations, e.g. casts. Is there some reason why? If
2009 Jul 11
2
[LLVMdev] ANTLR?
Right, I understand that. I was hoping there was such an
implementation using ANTLR since it looks like a fairly mature project.
I'm not sure how stable or mature Elsa is (but comments to clarify
that would be appreciated.). E.g., a quick scan of their Web page
shows the comment that they only have a partial type checker. It also
says their template instantiation is incomplete.
2009 Jul 11
0
[LLVMdev] ANTLR?
On Jul 11, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Vikram S. Adve wrote:
> Right, I understand that. I was hoping there was such an
> implementation using ANTLR since it looks like a fairly mature
> project.
Not that I'm aware of.
> I'm not sure how stable or mature Elsa is (but comments to clarify
> that would be appreciated.). E.g., a quick scan of their Web page
> shows the
2007 Dec 17
0
[LLVMdev] Elsa and LLVM and LLVM submissions
On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and modified my
> code to
> use the LLVMFoldingBuilder. Very nice!
>
> My question is this: I noticed that the folding builder doesn't fold
> some
> operations, e.g. casts. Is there some reason why? If I implemented
> some of
> these unhandled cases