similar to: [LLVMdev] CLR or C++/CLI interface to IR building API

On Aug 12, 2008, at 19:38, Scott Graham wrote: > Our front end is written in a CLR language, and we're currently > interacting with the middle/back-end by writing out .ll files. This > was convenient to get started with, but they're getting to a "huge > and unwieldy" stage now. Yup. This is in the FAQ now: http://llvm.org/docs/FAQ.html#langirgen > I was

Take a look at this page. It might give you more information: http://vmkit.llvm.org/ -bw On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Scott Graham <scott.llvm at h4ck3r.net> wrote: > Hi > > Our front end is written in a CLR language, and we're currently > interacting with the middle/back-end by writing out .ll files. This > was convenient to get started with, but they're

I've been trying as follows: Environment: 1. GNU/Linux 2.6 i686 - Ubuntu 6.06 2. Wine 0.9.29 Scenario: Trying to run an MFC 8 GUI application w/ CLR support: - Failed to run, given error message: "LdrInitializeThunk msvcm80d.dll failed to initialize, aborting" Tried workarounds: - Install MS .Net Framework (tried both 1.1. and 2.0) -- CrossOver Installation Wizard - failed

Backstory: I''m trying to use DRb for some in-house utility code. DRb itself seems to work fine, but I found that when I misspelled a method name, instead of reporting back a NoMethodError, the IronRuby process crashed immediately to the console. This is using a relatively recent build of IronRuby from Github Steps to repro: e = RuntimeError.new ''xyz'' dumped =

I am currently working on a project that involves using R and .Net. We're having performance issues with R, and we're wondering if there is a way to get around the R interpreter, particularly by compiling R directly for the .Net CLR? We're wondering if there is any initiatives to build such a compiler. Thanks, Leo [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi For .LL like: define void @Func() { %var1 = alloca double store double 0x40bb580000000000, double* %var1 ret void } ppc32 output is: ... lis 3, 16571 ori 3, 3, 22528 li 4, 0 stw 3, 8(1) stw 4, 12(1) ... I'm using the PPC backend's output as the "bytecode" for an interpreter that I would like to be able to run

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Scott Graham <scott.llvm at h4ck3r.net> wrote: >> I'm using the PPC backend's output as the "bytecode" for an interpreter >> that I would like to be able to run on both little- and big-endian >> platforms. The split stw's mean

Hi I'm working on switching from generating textual .ll files in my front end to using the llvm-c IR builder API instead. One thing that I really miss is that when I dump() to a .ll file for debugging, the type names are worse than useless, because many types have been merged with unrelated types that happen to have the same shape. This becomes very confusing when trying to map back to the

Hi I'm using the llvm-c wrapper, and trying to build some recursive types (using released 2.3). I get an assert on trying to create a second opaque pointer type after refining a first. The first time through creating an opaque pointer type, a new type is created and returned from PointerType::get, but the second time, ValueType (the opaque type) is found in the PointerTypes map, which seems

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Scott Graham <scott.llvm at h4ck3r.net> wrote: > I'm using the PPC backend's output as the "bytecode" for an interpreter > that I would like to be able to run on both little- and big-endian > platforms. The split stw's mean that i32s of the f64 are swapped in > memory on little-endian (thus foiling native-code interop).

I run into this problem as well. However, given the way LLVM represents types and their names, there is not an easy solution to this problem. I don't know of any real workaround that will not change the semantics of the code. - Daniel On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Scott Graham <scott.llvm at h4ck3r.net> wrote: > Hi > > I'm working on switching from generating textual

Hi Is there any rationale written down for why integer types don't carry (perhaps optional) signs somewhere? I feel like I might have read it somewhere before (and I see that it used to exist pre 2.0), but I can't find anything now. Relatedly, is there a reasonable way to attach user-data to a type or something? It feels very cumbersome to have to wrap all values and types in my front

Hi When using lli on Win32 (vs.net-built), on any non-trivial code, I get the following abort ERROR: Program used external function '_alloca' which could not be resolved! Checking the assembly from llc, the first alloca call is to allocate local vars in _main. Is this just the state of the code at 2.0 when built with vs.net, or is there something that I've managed to mis-build

Hello! I'm interested in using LLVM as a target for a compiler I've written in common lisp (SBCL). While I looked at perhaps wrapping the LLVM C++ interface, wrapping C++ in, well, anything not C++ is a pain. Someone on IRC mentioned that they didn't think I'd miss out on any functionality by directly emitting IR, but suggested I query the list. Do I miss out on any optimizations

This is a followup to a recent post on using atop() to obtain multiline expressions. My reading of the plotmath docs makes it clear that issuing (in base graphics) the specification par(cex = 2) doubles symbols and regular text in subsequent plotmath expressions. However, it is unclear to me what specifying cex _within_ the annotation function using plotmath should do, and the following seems

Hi I'm not sure that it meets your needs, but in making C# bindings[1], I had to build the one-big-dll with only public stuff exported. I did this by processing the llvm-c headers into a linker script (so the llvm-c interface is the determiner of what's visible, rather than requiring decoration in the source code). The llvm-c interface mostly only covers front end IR building, not

On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:09 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > I've checked that Intellisense can jump to an unlisted header file when > you ask for a declaration on a cpp file. So, what's the benefit of > having the header files explicitly listed in the solution? If it is for > text searching, maybe putting them on just one project (Hello.lib, for >

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > I set up a buildbot for llvm at http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall > It builds every single revision of llvm, runs the testsuite, and > reports the results. It takes about 3 minutes per build+test right > now (it's an 8 core machine). > > Currently i have it building x86_64-linux.

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > >> Anyone have any clever way of inserting a comment (or >> comment-ish-thing) that will make it to an .ll that's generated at the >> same time as writing out the bitcode? >> ... > > Try using llvm.var.annotation intrinsic. Thanks for the suggestion. I'd tried doing that by

Hi Any reason why the CMake build doesn't include more target backends under MSVC? (Currently only x86). I just tried turning on all the backends and everything seems to build OK. I don't know if they all run correctly. If there isn't a good reason, attached is the trivial patch to include all targets. scott -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was