similar to: [LLVMdev] Standard output binary mode on windows

Hi All, I have installed llvm-gcc4 patch to enable various llvm optimizations at -O1/-O2/-O3. This means instead of $ llvm-gcc4 --emit-llvm foo.c -o foo.bc $ opt foo.bc -o foo_optimized.bc $ llc foo_optimized.bc -o foo.o One can directly use $ llvm-gcc4 -O2 foo.c -o foo.o to get optimized foo.o - Devang + + if (optimize > 0) { + + +

> > Bill's change only affected darwin IIRC. I don't know that anyone has > > built GOMP on linux yet, and OpenMP hasn't been widely tested at all. > > I'd suggest using --enable-languages=c,c++ > > I am seeing the same errors with just building c,c++. (linux x86, also debian) This bit of Bill's patch did it: -#ifdef HAVE_GAS_HIDDEN + +#if

Hello, Julien > Unfortunately, this bug is back. ChangeStdoutToBinary is never called in > the current LLVM tree. I guess the call was lost during the > Bytecode->Bitcode transition. Applied, thanks! -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

Hi, While attempting to build the LLVM code from CVS today using gcc 4.1, I encountered the following error. Any idea how to proceed with the build? llvm[2]: Linking Debug executable llvm-as /home/ll/programs/source/scm/cvs/llvm/Debug/lib/libLLVMAsmParser.a(llvmAsmParser.o): In function `__static_initialization_and_destruction_0':

It looks to me like your libLLVMSupport.a didn't get built or you didn't update all of LLVM. Please make sure you update from the root of the tree with the command: cvs update -ARPd Reid. On Sat, 2006-06-24 at 13:16 +0100, Lexington Luthor wrote: > Hi, > > While attempting to build the LLVM code from CVS today using gcc 4.1, I > encountered the following error. Any idea

--- include/llvm/System/Program.h | 14 ++++++++++---- lib/System/Unix/Program.inc | 17 +++++++++-------- lib/System/Win32/Program.inc | 16 +++++++++------- 3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/llvm/System/Program.h b/include/llvm/System/Program.h index 14f9e9e..05c73ac 100644 --- a/include/llvm/System/Program.h +++ b/include/llvm/System/Program.h @@

I don't think this is the right direction for the system library to go. The System library is supposed to expose generic OS independent interfaces, not be a generic way for clients to get OS information. Ultimately I think a better API would be to provide a generic class which represents an executed operating system process, and includes operations to wait for its completion, redirect its IO,

Sent from my iPad On Jul 17, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 17, 2013, at 2:12 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Jul 16, 2013, at 5:51 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com>

On 2/6/08, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Feb 6, 2008, at 5:18 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > > > Hi, > > > >> if /bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile /s/llvm/obj.gcc42/./gcc/xgcc -B/ > >> s/llvm/obj.gcc42/./gcc/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/usr/ > >> local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/ >

On Jul 17, 2013, at 2:12 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 16, 2013, at 5:51 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: >>> ** Advices

On Feb 6, 2008, at 5:18 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi, > >> if /bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile /s/llvm/obj.gcc42/./gcc/xgcc -B/ >> s/llvm/obj.gcc42/./gcc/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/usr/ >> local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/ >> include -isystem /usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/sys-include - >> DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.

Hi, As no new suggestions came in, I would like to share my plans to move forward. — Feedbacks are very welcome! -- Like I summed up in my previous email (see below), there are two orthogonal approaches to this problem. I have chosen the second one (extend the reporting already used for inline asm). Regarding the first approach (front-end querying the back-end to build up diagnostic), it needs

Hi, Thanks all for the insight comments. Let me sum up at a high level what proposals we actually have (sorry if I misinterpreted or missed something, do not hesitate to correct me): 1. Make LLVM defines some APIs that exposes some internal information so that a front-end can use them to build-up some diagnostics. 2. Make LLVM builds up a diagnostic and let a front-end maps this diagnostic to

I can't build llvm-gcc from working directories updated an hour ago. -Dave /tools/llvm-tools/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/g++ -c -g -DENABLE_CHECKING -DENABLE_ASSERT_CHECKING -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -Wno-unused -DTARGET_NAME=\"i686-pc-linux-gnu\" -DENABLE_LLVM

> If you're running opt on the command line directly, then use the > "-p" option. See "-help" for more information on that. > > -bw > I have a couple of more questions. 1. Does -std-compile-opts of opt do the same optimization with llvm-gcc with -O[1-3] options? If I want to debug into passes through llvm-gcc, how do I set a breakpoint right before pass

--- include/llvm/System/Program.h | 8 ++++---- lib/System/Unix/Program.inc | 30 +++++++++++++++--------------- 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/llvm/System/Program.h b/include/llvm/System/Program.h index 49de7cf..14f9e9e 100644 --- a/include/llvm/System/Program.h +++ b/include/llvm/System/Program.h @@ -97,12 +97,12 @@ namespace sys { ///

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 16, 2013, at 5:51 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> > wrote: > > ** Advices Needed ** > > 1. Decide whether or not we want such capabilities (if we do not we may >

On Jul 16, 2013, at 5:51 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: >> ** Advices Needed ** >> >> 1. Decide whether or not we want such capabilities (if we do not we may just >> add sporadically the support for a new warning/group of warning/error). >> 2. Come

I am trying to wrap my head around using templates and was wondering what the execution context was, puppetmaster or client? I thought it was client since it would have to also account for facter-based variables, but recent testing on something I thought was pretty neat turned out to cause puppetmaster to segfault in an apparent attempt to evaluate the template on the server side. The