similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM Win32 Issue

Hola Aaron, Just having that code didn't work since the linker still stripped it out, so I have that function called from the code in the system that actually is being used by our app. Kinda grubby, but I include: #include "llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86TargetMachine.h" Which is in the LLVM lib, not the LLVM inc directory. This little maneuver made our Mac builds really unhappy, so

Hello all, I'm trying to bring an LLVM-based project that is working on Linux up on Win32. I am having problems with llvm::ExecutionEngine::create returning a NULL. I traced it to these lines: // Unless the interpreter was explicitly selected, try making a JIT. if (!ForceInterpreter && JITCtor) EE = JITCtor(MP, ErrorStr); // If we can't make a JIT, make an

Hi all, After creating a new LLVM-based project, I faced an odd problem. ExecutionEngine::create always retuned null. After some investigation I found out that it was due to the target architecture not getting registered. I'm using Visual C++ 2005 and in the X86TargetMachine.cpp file an extern variable X86TargetMachineModule is created to 'ensure' that the module is linked in. It

Nicolas, In Visual Studio 2005, you can force the linker to include specific symbols. In your project, under "Configuration Properties/Linker/Input/Force Symbol References", try adding _X86TargetMachineModule. Hope that helps! Stein Pedersen _____ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Nicolas Capens Sent: 27. mai 2008 00:11

These two subclasses of X86TargetMachine are basically identical. The *only* thing that's different is the constructor. And that *only* differs in the is64Bit argument that it passes to the X86TargetMachine constructor. Replacing the hard-coded 'true' or 'false' with 'Triple(TT).getArch()==Triple::x86_64' makes them *actually* identical. Can we just ditch the

On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 14:23 -0800, Jim Grosbach wrote: > Hi David, > > AFAIK, the answer is basically “because it’s always been that way.” I > seem to recall there were some things that were different (data layout > string and such), but that could also be parameterized if it hasn’t > been already by the recent refactorings, I suppose. It is *all* now parameterized. The classes

Hola LLVMers, Our project is cross platform and on Windows we use VStudio 2005. VStudio presents a couple of issues related around it's STL implementation and also it's non-respect for the no-return semantic of abort(). I've fixed it locally, but I'd like to send a patch so I don't have to do this every time I update from the source repository. So.... if I'm

On Thu, 31 May 2007, Chuck Rose III wrote: > Our project is cross platform and on Windows we use VStudio 2005. > VStudio presents a couple of issues related around it's STL > implementation and also it's non-respect for the no-return semantic of > abort(). Ok. We want the source to be portable, so it's goodness to get these fixes into the main tree. > I've fixed

Here are the two problem areas: RegisterInfoEmitter.cpp // Emit the subregister + index mapping function based on the information // calculated above. OS << "unsigned " << ClassName << "::getSubReg(unsigned RegNo, unsigned Index) const {\n" << " switch (RegNo) {\n" << " default: abort(); break;\n"; ...

Hello LLVMers, For the windows side of my team's product, I use the VStudio project files included in the LLVM tree (which are VStudio 2k3 files). I just switched over to the SVN sources yesterday and spent some time working with those project files to get things to build cleanly on my system. We use VStudio 2k5, so I have to go through a conversion process which may be the cause of some

Hi Chuck, On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 11:16 -0700, Chuck Rose III wrote: > Hello LLVMers, > > > > For the windows side of my team’s product, I use the VStudio project > files included in the LLVM tree (which are VStudio 2k3 files). I just > switched over to the SVN sources yesterday and spent some time working > with those project files to get things to build cleanly on my

Hola Reid, Cool deal. I think I have all the bugs worked out as I'm building cleanly now in one "build all" pass as opposed to two. I'm going to integrate and test the results with our system. Will the patch process be sufficient for this kind of change (~350K of VStudio XML goo)? Should I request commit access, if at least for the vstudio stuff? Thanks, Chuck.

On 31/05/07, Chuck Rose III <cfr at adobe.com> wrote: > Here are the two problem areas: > > RegisterInfoEmitter.cpp > > // Emit the subregister + index mapping function based on the > information > // calculated above. > OS << "unsigned " << ClassName > << "::getSubReg(unsigned RegNo, unsigned Index) const {\n" >

Nope, it generates an error, not a warning-as-error. (LLVM generates a whole host of warnings when run through the VStudio STL implementation). I misspoke earlier about VStudio ignoring noreturn. I investigated further and found that the implementation of abort in VStudio 2k5 is not tagged noreturn, hence the error. Thanks, Chuck. -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at

On Sep 5, 2007, at 5:08 PM, Chuck Rose III wrote: > Hola Dale, > > > > I spent some time walking through what’s going on with a friend of > mine from VStudio. Category is given 2 bits in the APFloat class > definition. It’s sign extending the enum value for the comparisons > when it loads it out of the class, so the 2 becomes a -2 and the > comparison fails.

Dale Johannesen wrote:- > >I spent some time walking through what?s going on with a friend of > >mine from VStudio. Category is given 2 bits in the APFloat class > >definition. It?s sign extending the enum value for the comparisons > >when it loads it out of the class, so the 2 becomes a -2 and the > >comparison fails. He sent me a piece of code which I

> The x86-64 one probably doesn't work for Winodws. That's likely the > issue. Well, x86-64 stub was never ported to intel assembler, I expect to see 32-bit one used on windows64. In general, the whole windows64 support is missed mainly due to crazy calling convetion invented by Microsoft. So, all calls from code being JITed to external functions will be clearly broken (if they

It's in debug. I'm having a look at the assembler it's producing right now and it's definitely a little odd for what should be a simple assignment in zeroSignificand. ________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Dale Johannesen Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 2:39 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing

Thanks for your comment. I also tried for LLVM 2.2 but got the same compilation errors on VS2005. (I didn't modify anything before the compilation) I just wonder if I need bison and flex even just in the case of compiling them on VS2005 without changing anything because the LLVM doc says "If you plan to modify any .y or .l files, you will need to have bison and/or flex installed where

Hello, Chuck > I've had a look at the stubs before and I think I'm circumventing them > in the example program since I populate the table and compile the > functions in the order so that things never need to be done lazily, but > I'll look further. Well, anyway stubs are definitely wrong from windows64 and this should be fixed, otherwise funny stuff can happen from time to