similar to: [LLVMdev] compilaton problem

Hello, Boris > /home/borist/builds/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l: In function 'int > llvmAsmlex()': > Could it be a problem with my version of gcc (V4.2.2) on Linux x86_64? No. These files were removed from the svn, however, they were used to generate source files and such generated files still alive in your tree. Remove Lexer.cpp and Lexer.h (same applies for tablegen). You can

Hello With the latest LLVM from Subversion (rev48737 from http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk) I'm getting make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/Lang/llvm/_Obj/lib/AsmParser' llvm[2]: Flexing Lexer.l llvm[2]: Compiling Lexer.cpp for Debug build /usr/src/Lang/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l: In function 'int llvmAsmlex()': /usr/src/Lang/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l:278: error:

On 4/16/06, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote: > > I've put the pre-release tar balls here: > http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.7/ > The build failed on i686-pc-linux-gnu. llvm[2]: Flexing FileLexer.l llvm[2]: Compiling FileLexer.cpp for Release build /home/rogelio/Desktop/llvm/utils/TableGen/FileLexer.l: In function 'int Filelex()':

The current btrfs support did not handled multiple stripes stored in chunk items, hence skipping the physical addresses that were needed to do the mapping. Besides, the chunk tree may contain DEV_ITEM keys which store information on all of the underlying block devices, so we must skip them instead of finishing lookup. The bug was reproduced with btrfs-progs v4.2.2. Cc: Gene Cumm <gene.cumm

On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Paulo Alcantara <pcacjr at gmail.com> wrote: > The current btrfs support did not handled multiple stripes stored in > chunk items, hence skipping the physical addresses that were needed to > do the mapping. > > Besides, the chunk tree may contain DEV_ITEM keys which store > information on all of the underlying block devices, so we must skip

On 4/19/06, Rogelio Serrano <rogelio.serrano at gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/16/06, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote: > > > > I've put the pre-release tar balls here: > > http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.7/ > > > > The build failed on i686-pc-linux-gnu. > > llvm[2]: Flexing FileLexer.l > llvm[2]: Compiling FileLexer.cpp for Release build

Hi all I have been doing series of linear regression models lm(). In this case the execution time and memory usage becomes a huge issue. I have therefore been trying to speed the process and limit the memory usage. Here follows part of the code do give better understanding of what I am doing: modela <- lm(RSSYS10 ~ RS_AGE + RS_AGESQ + SEX + RS_BMI) frssys <-

The current btrfs support did not handled multiple stripes stored in chunk items, hence skipping the physical addresses that were needed to do the mapping. Besides, the chunk tree may contain DEV_ITEM keys which store information on all of the underlying block devices, so we must skip them instead of finishing lookup. The bug was reproduced with btrfs-progs v4.2.2. Cc: Gene Cumm <gene.cumm

The current btrfs support did not handled multiple stripes stored in chunk items, hence skipping the physical addresses that were needed to do the mapping. Besides, the chunk tree may contain DEV_ITEM keys which store information on all of the underlying block devices, so we must skip them instead of finishing lookup. The bug was reproduced with btrfs-progs v4.2.2. Cc: Gene Cumm <gene.cumm

I've put the pre-release tar balls here: http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.7/ I'm asking for help to test this release and to review documentation. If anyone can spare some time to help out, I would really appreciate it. The more people that test, the better this release will be. Secondly, now that the tarballs have been created, everyone is free to check in documentation changes into the

Jeff & others A couple words on how lib/System works that might help you. 1. The configure script identifies the build host and puts it in the $build variable. We use that to determine the basic kind of platform and put it in a variable named $OS. The value of $OS can be: Linux, FreeBSD, Interix, SunOS, Darwin, etc. 2. The platform name is used to create a link from

Is this the appropriate place for GSoC conversations? If I understand the proposal correctly, there should be a lexer (written in R) that exposes an API; that API would be used by segregated mini-parsers (Roclets) which do the dirty work of Roxygen -> {html, LaTeX, DocBook, ...} translation. The lexer should ship with a proof-of-concept Roclet. Have I missed anything?

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > Well, maybe, we should just change the Linux kernel instead of tweaking > our tokenizer too hard. > This is silly. Writing a simple and maintainable lexer is not hard (look e.g. at https://reviews.llvm.org/D10817). There are some complicated context-sensitive cases in linker scripts that break our approach

>> Lexing is the one issue though. > > How do you mean? I think he's observing that a majority of the tutorial code is actually spent on the lexer and parser, not on the llvm-specific pieces. > I'm just fiddling around with it now. The lexer, parser and AST > written using > camlp4 might look something like this in OCaml: Sure, the existing tutorial would be

> Hmm..., the crux of not being able to lex arithmetic expressions seems to > be due to lack of context sensitivity. E.g. consider `foo*bar`. Could be a > multiplication, or could be a glob pattern. > > Looking at the code more closely, adding context sensitivity wouldn't be > that hard. In fact, our ScriptParserBase class is actually a lexer (look at > the interface; it

Hi everyone. Because there is still a little confusion about the huge document, I want to know what llvm can provide when we customize our new compiler? For example, a normal compiler includes lexer, parser, intermediate code generator , optimizer and target code generator. According to llvm documents, it seems that llvm can provide a better intermediate code presentation. And what else can it

Hello, I would like to gather some ideas and opinions on how to make the default AsmLexer more flexible when dealing with Identifiers. When the lexer emits something as an "Identifier" (read. String of characters) it means that it needs to be parsed all at once in a single go, even if it contains elements that might be wanted to be parsed as separate entities. In that case it is needed

On Sunday 25 November 2007 05:28, Aaron Gray wrote: > > On Sunday 25 November 2007 03:42, Christopher Lamb wrote: > >> Try this google query. I know there's been some discussion/work on > >> OCaml and LLVM. > >> > >> site:lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev OCaml interface > > > > I just rediscovered the OCaml bindings in bindings/ocaml

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > Sean, > > So as you noticed that linker script tokenization rule is not very trivial > -- it is context sensitive. The current lexer is extremely simple and > almost always works well. Improving "almost always" to "perfect" is not > high priority because we have many more high

Hello: I've been trying for days now to get igraph working on a debian sarge install. There does not appear to be any pre-built packages, and when I try and install within R, it blows up on the final linking, claiming its unable to find libgfortran (which IS installed, and IS working for all other users of the compiler). I started up R and ran: install.packages("igraph"). It