similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM 2.3 release moved to monday

On Sep 10, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Bob Wilson wrote: > Didn't Benjamin already fix this in svn 163502? Looks that way.. > On Sep 10, 2012, at 10:08 AM, Chad Rosier <mcrosier at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Sep 7, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Nuno Lopes wrote: >> >>> The linking issue is a recent breakage. >>> I traced it back to r163175. Basically

Hello, I’m an undergraduate student studying CS in the South China University of Technology. I have been using clang compiler and related tools since I started studying C++ and I would like to work on LLVM in this year’s GSoC. I am interested in “Implement a single updater class for Dominators”. [1] I have achieved a bronze medal in the 2017 ACM-ICPC Asia Xian Regional Contest [2] (being a

Hi Alex Correction : Kaleidoscope chapter 1 & 2 are up-to-date. But chapter 3..5 are not. On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 23:22, Praveen Velliengiri < praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Alex > Sorry for late reply > > The New ORC APIs support concurrent compilation. > I'm not aware of any migration guide to ORC v2 from v1. But there is a > in-tree classes called

Hi folks, Rather by accident than on purpose I looked at the release notes and found the following: http://releases.llvm.org/8.0.0/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#changes-to-the-jit-apis TL;DR: Orc v1 is deprecated and will be removed in the next release. I have several questions in this regard: 1. Is there a migration guide I can use to update my code to the new version? 2. Is there any development

I've recently upgraded my project-local copy of LLVM from 3.1svn to the latest 3.2svn, and all hell broke loose in my attempts to build OCaml projects. Trying to narrow it down, I tried testing examples/OCaml-Kaleidoscope and eventually test/Bindings, only to discover that literally nothing in the repository which uses the OCaml bindings seems to build in the current trunk: -

SUCCESS! Sorry, I had removed the addFnAttr() call by accident. Using the basicAA pass and ReadOnly, as you suggested, works like a charm! :) > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Pieke > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 4:40 PM > To: 'Duncan Sands' > Cc: 'llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu'; 'Dan Gohman' > Subject: RE: [LLVMdev] Optimization of calls to

On Sep 7, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Nuno Lopes wrote: > The linking issue is a recent breakage. > I traced it back to r163175. Basically LLVMConstInlineAsm() got an additional parameter, but the C headers and the OCaml bindings were not updated accordingly. r163175 was my change. I'm not familiar with the OCaml project. If I'm responsible for updating said C headers/OCaml bindings, would

On Nov 15, 2010, at 8:42 AM, Rob Pieke wrote: > SUCCESS! > > Sorry, I had removed the addFnAttr() call by accident. Using the basicAA pass and ReadOnly, as you suggested, works like a charm! > > :) Thanks. I've updated the documentation and examples in r119169. I didn't update the OCaml documentation or examples yet. It looks like the OCaml bindings don't expose

The linking issue is a recent breakage. I traced it back to r163175. Basically LLVMConstInlineAsm() got an additional parameter, but the C headers and the OCaml bindings were not updated accordingly. About the miscompilations, can you provide further details? Nuno ----- Original Message ----- > I've recently upgraded my project-local copy of LLVM from 3.1svn to the > latest

Hi Chijun, Thanks for your interest in the project. I have gone through most of the LLVM Kaleidoscope tutorial and I have > watched the video of the presentation “Dominator Trees and incremental > updates that transcend time” presented on the 2017 LLVM Developers’ > Meeting. I have also started to understand the algorithm mentioned in > the comments of the code related to the

Didn't Benjamin already fix this in svn 163502? On Sep 10, 2012, at 10:08 AM, Chad Rosier <mcrosier at apple.com> wrote: > > On Sep 7, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Nuno Lopes wrote: > >> The linking issue is a recent breakage. >> I traced it back to r163175. Basically LLVMConstInlineAsm() got an additional parameter, but the C headers and the OCaml bindings were not updated

Hello list, Since reading the kaleidoscope tutorial I have decided to play around with creating a language I've had in the back of my mind for some time. I would prefer not to write the front end in c or c++ though if it can be avoided. I read online that the ocaml bindings are distributed with llvm but are not always as up to date as the c or c++ bindings. Is this (still) the case? Is

I'm using the gvn pass, not sure about basic-aa. I've copied the code as-is from http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/LangImpl4.html#code and added "F->addFnAttr( Attribute::ReadOnly )" after "Function *F = Function::Create(FT, Function::ExternalLinkage, Name, TheModule)". The passes it sets up are: // Set up the optimizer pipeline. Start with registering info about

The 3.6 release is drawing nearer, but the release notes could still use a lot of improvement: LLVM: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/release_36/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst Clang: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang/blob/release_36/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst The good news is that they can be updated all the way up until release. If you have a patch for the release notes, commit it directly to the

Hello. I have 5 measurement points, my dependent variable is ordinal (0 - 3), and I want to visualize my data. I'm pretty new to R. What I want is to find out whether people with different baseline covariates have different trajectories, so I want a plot with the means trajectory of my dependent variable (the individual points do not make a lot of sense in ordinal data) on each measurement

I don't know if the toy program in chapter 4 of the tutorial implementing Kaleidoscope in llvm with C++ is part of your regression suite, but with the version of llvm I installed last weekend, it does not compile: hendrik at lovesong:~/dv/llvm/tut$ g++ -g toy.cpp `llvm-config --cppflags --ldflags --libs core jit native` -O3 -o toy toy.cpp: In member function ‘virtual llvm::Value*

Hi all, I need a little help for construct an state's map on R. The first problem is to get the data. I have a datafile of longitude and latitude in the follow format: trajectory latitude longtude T -22.045618 -51.287056 T -22.067078 -51.265888 T -22.067039 -51.207249 T -22.059690 -48.089695 T -22.075529 -48.074608 T -22.072460 -48.044472 T -22.062767 -48.298473 T -22.077349

Hi Kuba, Thanks for your advice in your previous letter. During last week, I have read the documents on Doxygen and the source code of the DomTreeBase/DomTree/PostDomTree/DeferredDominance class, I believe now I have a much better understanding on the relationship between these classes and how DeferredDominance class performs lazy updates. I have also learnt the current usage and drawbacks of

> Note that C bindings have been introduced since 2005, so there may be > a different route available than was taken then. Look in include/llvm- > c. The intent of the C bindings is to enable high-level language > bindings. The current focus is on enabling front-end compilers. Ocaml > and Haskell bindings have been developed atop them, the former being > in the LLVM source

Greetings, I have the following problem: I want to compare a "parameter trajectory", i.e. a series of real numbers (representing equidistant samples of a time-varying parameter) produced by some "model", to a reference trajectory, measured from the real world, in order to get a rating of how good the model that produced the first trajectory is. Ok, so I use the RMS of the