similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM as a DLL

Michael T. Richter wrote: > Apparently the APIs in the LLVM docs missed your > attention. They're sneaky that way because, you know, > they just form the bulk of available documentation. I began my original message saying that I was providing "constructive criticism". That means I want to HELP if I can. Your sarcastic attitude is unprofessional. > The

me22.ca wrote: > You said that if I have to install GCC, you might as well > just use it for everything. That statement very clearly > doesn't apply anymore, since it's binutils that's the > dependency. Or if you still stand by it, it means that > you consider GCC to also be "incomplete". How do I get the necessary binutils on Windoze? Install MinGW or

On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 16:30 +1000, kr512 wrote: > Michael T. Richter wrote: > > Apparently the APIs in the LLVM docs missed your > > attention. They're sneaky that way because, you know, > > they just form the bulk of available documentation. > I began my original message saying that I was providing > "constructive criticism". That means I want to

I wrote: > The Solution: Make LLVM usable as a DLL or SLL in Windoze, > capable of generating a finished ready-to-execute .EXE or > .DLL file, without requiring that MinGW or Cygwin be > installed first. Michael T. Richter replied: > You will be welcomed with open arms by the LLVM community > when you write this. I look forward to your announcement > with bated breath.

Jon Harrop wrote: > Can you explain why you would like to generate DLLs on the > customer's computer rather than using LLVM as a JIT > compiler? Customers/clients unhappy with the inefficiency, extra CPU and RAM usage, and performance penalty of JIT. They require a faster, more efficient solution. The solution is to fully compile programs to native code at the time of

Not that I sympathize with the OP's manners but... Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> writes: > On May 10, 2008, at 7:55 PM, kr512 wrote: > >> See how gcc is invoked to generate the final executable >> file. This means LLVM is an incomplete backend, >> unfortunately. >> > That's only a convenience. GCC generates assembly code too and calls

Oh another thing, consider this question that some people will be asking: Why not use GCC to do what LLVM does, and skip the hassle of using LLVM entirely? ESPECIALLY considering that LLVM cannot be used without GCC. Even if you are using LLVM as a back-end only, for compiling LLVM bytecode only, GCC is still required to convert the "llc" output assembly .S file into a

Chris Lattner wrote: > If you'd prefer to use GCC, go for it. No one is forcing > you to use LLVM. No, we would prefer to use LLVM, but a missing part in LLVM makes it difficult. It would be wonderful if this missing part could be supplied. > You are seriously ignorant of what LLVM is all about. > Please go inform yourself. Alright, I read some more on llvm.org and it

Owen Anderson wrote: > There's nothing particularly stopping you from having your > installation package include copies of gas and ld, I disagree. gas and ld are not available on Windoze, except via MinGW. Yes I can make or tell my customers to install MinGW, but if MinGW is installed, then I don't need LLVM. (More about this further ahead) > You're welcome to think

"Razvan Aciu" <admin at kam.ro> writes: [snip] > The problem is with the gcc and binutils licence. This is GPL and [snip] I agree with Owen Anderson on this one (altough IANAL, etc). [snip] > In that respect, if someone can adapt the MASM templates to produce > NASM directives (it is the only thing that needs to be changed), these > updates will be more than

On May 13, 2008, at 1:30 AM, kr512 wrote: > > Nevertheless, LLVM is not provided as a ready-to-use DLL, > unfortunately. This is exactly why I asked if you had downloaded and compiled it. If you had, you might have noticed that it does produce a set of ready-to- use shared libraries. I'm sorry that it did not build for you under Visual Studio, but patches are welcome. In the

I''ve been reading up on Berkeley DB and I''ve been refelcting on the Rails philosophy and it just seemed to me like the two should go together hand in glove. Rails seeks to abstract the programer from squirrely database coding which is great. My only problem is that you''re still left with a large component, namely the databsase server (MySQL, PostgreSQL..etc) which

USING: rsync version 3.0.6 protocol version 30 on a Sun Solaris 10 x86. This is a precompiled version from opencsw. /opt/csw/bin/rsync -n -axzH -v --delete-after --log-file=$RSYNCOUTPUT/export_-${DAILYDT}X --rsync-path=/opt/csw/bin/rsync -e "ssh -i /root/.ssh/id_hertz" --max-delete=100 /export/.zfs/snapshot/$DAILYDT/ hertz3:/zvol/backup/gauss/export When I added the

Please let me know where i have to type below thing to RSQLite database get installed.Please let me know the solution.Thanks in advance RSQLite -- Embedding the SQLite engine in R (The RSQLite package includes a recent copy of the SQLite distribution from http://www.sqlite.org.) Installation ------------ There are 3 alternatives for installation: 1. Simple installation: R CMD

Hello, I noticed, that whenever I install a package on CentOS 5.x, rpms for multiple architectures are installed: yum install sqlite-devel Loading "fastestmirror" plugin Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: centos.intergenia.de * updates: centos.intergenia.de * addons: centos.intergenia.de * extras: centos.intergenia.de base 100%

Hi, I have pushed my radio player for FxOS to GitHub: https://github.com/emilis/worldradioplayer Currently it uses a precompiled data from http://dir.xiph.org/yp.xml: https://raw.github.com/emilis/worldradioplayer/master/static/js/data/xiph.org.stations.json I will have to switch to asynchronous station list loading and filtering in the near future and then will nag you again about the JSON API

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Don't know if it is a mirror synch issue or what else. Given a CentOS 6.1, if I give the commands: # yum clean all # yum update I get this output Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, refresh-packagekit Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: it.centos.contactlab.it * centosplus: mirror.crazynetwork.it * extras: mirror.crazynetwork.it

Bear with me, this is CentOS related. :) I have a python CGI that's behaving weirldy on Whitebox systems that've been switched over to CentOS 4 (ages ago, no other problems to speak of aside from this one). I've broken the problem down to a minimal test case... 1. Create a small database # sqlite3 /tmp/testcase.db 'CREATE TABLE testtable ( date date primary key unique, name

Thanks for your replies. This is indeed a helpful mailing list. I made some more researches about the licensing issue and this is what I discovered: - from FSF it seems that packaging together a GPL application and a commercial one it is a corner case of licensing. Here is what they say: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation

Le 05/01/2020 ? 14:27, Rowland penny via samba a ?crit?: > On 05/01/2020 11:36, Ni Co wrote: >> Hello Rowloand, >> >> ok, I just keep "default" for the mounting. >> >> I changed the path of my share : >> >> [homes] >> comment = User Home Folder >> path = /home/%U >> read only = no >> follow symlinks = yes >> wide