similar to: [LLVMdev] Apple's GCC and .s/.S files in llvm-test (fwd)

On Mar 24, 2008, at 3:18 PM, David Vandevoorde wrote: > > On Mar 24, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > [...] >> I don't see a good way to do >> full-line comments that works both if you run the preprocessor and if >> you don't. > > > Could you use "##" instead of "#"? Pragmatically, that works (as I'm sure you know).

On Mar 25, 2008, at 1:08 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > On Mar 24, 2008, at 3:18 PM, David Vandevoorde wrote: > >> >> On Mar 24, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: >> [...] >>> I don't see a good way to do >>> full-line comments that works both if you run the preprocessor and >>> if >>> you don't. >> >>

On Mar 24, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: [...] > I don't see a good way to do > full-line comments that works both if you run the preprocessor and if > you don't. Could you use "##" instead of "#"? Daveed

Hello, Apple's GCC does not make the distinction between .s and .S files and always run the preprocessor. From the man: | file.s | Assembler code. Apple's version of GCC runs the preprocessor on these | files as well as those ending in .S. | | file.S | Assembler code which must be preprocessed. The problem is that sometimes llc generates comments in the assembly that

On Dec 23, 2009, at 6:26 PM, Julien Lerouge wrote: > Hello folks, > > The makefile for 177.mesa says that for a small problem size, it will > get 100 frames. But in the spec sources I have, the test folder only > contains numbers for 10 frames: > > $ speccpu2000/benchspec/CFP2000/177.mesa/data $ wc -l test/input/ > numbers > 10 test/input/numbers > >

Hello folks, The makefile for 177.mesa says that for a small problem size, it will get 100 frames. But in the spec sources I have, the test folder only contains numbers for 10 frames: $ speccpu2000/benchspec/CFP2000/177.mesa/data $ wc -l test/input/numbers 10 test/input/numbers Generating 100 frames causes undefined behaviour because the program is doing unchecked fscanf on that

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:32:18AM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Jul 30, 2008, at 11:17 AM, Julien Lerouge wrote: >> ../../../llvm-gcc4.2-src/gcc/libgcc2.c:2095: error: conflicting types >> for 'VirtualProtect' >> >> c:/cygwin/home/jlerouge/buildbot/llvm/lib/../include/winbase.h:1998: >> error: previous declaration of 'VirtualProtect' was here

When I started this, I deliberately restricted the question to what should go in the IR. The fact of recording hints in the IR should not be controversial; it can't be better not to have them than to have them. Unfortunately, others used this as a springboard for discussing whether and how the inliner should use those hints. We aren't really ready to have that discussion,

David Vandevoorde a écrit : > On Aug 27, 2009, at 3:07 AM, Cédric Venet wrote: > > >> David Vandevoorde a écrit : >> >>> I don't think those are _good_ reasons though: If one doesn't want >>> a C+ + function to be inlined, one shouldn't define it inline. >>> >>> >>> >> You must not have written a

Hello, Since 2.5 is near, I have been trying to build llvm and llvm-gcc for MingW, but hit several problem (using the current trunk). First issue is that unittests don't build for MingW, the attached patch should fix it. Second issue is that llvm-gcc fails for me with the following error: /c/cygwin/home/jlerouge/buildbot/llvm-test/gcc-build/./gcc/xgcc

On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 05:04:17PM -0800, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Jan 8, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Julien Lerouge wrote: > >Hello, > > > >The CodeExtractor contains a std::set<BasicBlock*> to keep track > >of the > >blocks to extract. Iterators on this set are not deterministic, and so > >the functions that are generated are not (the order of the >

On 03/10/2014 06:56 PM, Ralph Giles wrote: > On 2014-03-10 2:47 PM, Jonathan Lennox wrote: >> If I add --disable-asm to the build, it builds correctly. >> >> Does anyone have experience with Apple assembler directives to know >> what?s the best way to fix this? I assume the Perl script to generate >> the assembler file is going to need to be modified somehow. >

On Jan 8, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Julien Lerouge wrote: > Hello, > > The CodeExtractor contains a std::set<BasicBlock*> to keep track of > the > blocks to extract. Iterators on this set are not deterministic, and so > the functions that are generated are not (the order of the > inputs/outputs can change). > > The attached patch uses a SetVector instead. Ok to apply ?

On Feb 24, 2009, at 10:03 PM, Julien Lerouge wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 06:24:17PM -0800, Julien Lerouge wrote: >> I haven't tested with objdir != srcdir. > > Ok, that was broken. Attached is a smaller diff that should work in > all > cases. This sounds really cool Julien! Two questions: 1) does it preserve the checking that the existing tcl stuff does, which

Hello folks, I have a small piece of C code written like this: typedef struct { char a; int b; int c; } foo; foo myFoo[5] = {{0}}; With llvm-gcc 2.5, I get the following IR: %struct.foo = type { i8, i32, i32 } @myFoo = global [5 x %struct.foo] zeroinitializer, align 32 With the current 2.6, I get this: %0 = type { i8, [11 x i8] }

>> 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

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 03:06:54PM -0700, Julien Lerouge wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:32:18AM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote: > > On Jul 30, 2008, at 11:17 AM, Julien Lerouge wrote: > >> ../../../llvm-gcc4.2-src/gcc/libgcc2.c:2095: error: conflicting types > >> for 'VirtualProtect' > >> > >>

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 06:24:17PM -0800, Julien Lerouge wrote: > I haven't tested with objdir != srcdir. Ok, that was broken. Attached is a smaller diff that should work in all cases. Julien -- Julien Lerouge PGP Key Id: 0xB1964A62 PGP Fingerprint: 392D 4BAD DB8B CE7F 4E5F FA3C 62DB 4AA7 B196 4A62 PGP Public Key from: keyserver.pgp.com -------------- next part -------------- Index:

All, Here's an update on the Developer's Meeting. I've created a page for the meeting on the main web site at http://llvm.org/DevMtgMay2007.html. If you want to find out the latest, please visit that page. From here on out, I will be tracking the meeting's progress on that page. However, I'll still send out one of these update notes when there are significant developments.

Hello, I have the following sequence of passes (using --debug-pass=Structure): ... ModulePass Manager FunctionPass Manager Preliminary module verification Dominator Tree Construction Module Verifier MyModulePass0 MyAnalysis Basic CallGraph Construction MyModulePass1 MyAnalysis MyModulePass2 Basic CallGraph Construction Call Graph SCC Pass