similar to: [LLVMdev] Fix build on GCC 4.3

Please commit. On Aug 20, 2008, at 8:02 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > Index: include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h > =================================================================== > --- include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h (revision 55101) > +++ include/llvm/ADT/APInt.h (working copy) > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > #include <cassert> > #include <iosfwd> > #include <string> >

Hi, On Fedora 9 GCC 4.3, LLVMCConfigurationEmitter.cpp needs #include <typeinfo>. ValueTracking.cpp needs #include <cstring>. Thanks. --Zhongxing Xu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20080603/38f917f4/attachment.html>

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 2:28 PM Tim Shen <timshen at google.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:49 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > So I stumbled across an issue that I think is a bit fundamental: > > The xray runtime uses the C++ standard library. > > This seems like a problem because whatever C++ standard library is used to > compile the

So I stumbled across an issue that I think is a bit fundamental: The xray runtime uses the C++ standard library. This seems like a problem because whatever C++ standard library is used to compile the XRay runtime may not be the same as the C++ standard library (if any) that is used to build the target application and link XRay into. Does this make sense? Is this a problem? Talking to Chandler

On Jun 3, 2008, at 6:48 AM, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > Hi, > > On Fedora 9 GCC 4.3, > > LLVMCConfigurationEmitter.cpp needs #include <typeinfo>. > ValueTracking.cpp needs #include <cstring>. Fixed, thanks: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20080602/063303.html -Chris

sorry ! I have re-corrected the title. ------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------ 发件人: "Sheng Wang"<wansheg at gmail.com>; 发送时间: 2009年9月4日(星期五) 下午3:23 收件人: "LLVMdev"<LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu>; 主题: [LLVMdev] Dose I need to build llvm-gcc front-end from sourceresolve this error? /* mm.cpp */ #include<iostream> using namespace std; struct xx{ int x;

Hi.. Updated so you now set alignment through LLVMInstrSetAlignment. Anders Johnsen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ParamAttr.patch Type: text/x-diff Size: 7420 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20080424/cb72b4bb/attachment.patch>

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:34 PM Dean Michael Berris <dean.berris at gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 Mar 2017, at 15:39, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017, 4:10 PM Dean Michael Berris <dean.berris at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On 9 Mar 2017, at 09:32, David Blaikie via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017, 4:10 PM Dean Michael Berris <dean.berris at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 9 Mar 2017, at 09:32, David Blaikie via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > I agree that we should clean up the standard library usage even just for > consistency. > > > > +1 -- now that I think about it, it should be fairly doable

Thanks for the feedback thus far! I've updated the header file, and enclosed a complete patch against LLVM. This passes all the regtests, and I'll be doing more thorough testing of LLVM itself with the patch. I've included some basic unit tests, but could probably do more here... Not sure it's worth delaying the initial submission though, as the best testing is to use a hash

Hi Anders, Thanks for the patch. I'd like you to incorporate some feedback before I apply it, though. > Index: include/llvm/Argument.h > =================================================================== > --- include/llvm/Argument.h (revision 50213) > +++ include/llvm/Argument.h (working copy) > @@ -60,7 +60,16 @@ > + > + /// setByValAttr - Set true to give the

On 10/3/14 10:16 AM, Dan Albert wrote: >> >> I try to build libc++ and libc++abi for host x86_64(linux) and target >> arm(linux) but fail. >> > > Failing in what way? If this isn't working out of the box, we've done > something wrong. Yeah, it would help to know more specifics about where you're getting stuck. > > jroelofs might know more... For

When built using the guidelines in the README.LLVM to use the system's libstdc++ I get the following types of errors whenever I try to use the standard library (say by running the front end test suite in llvm/test): /usr/include/c++/4.0.0/cmath:49:28: error: bits/c++config.h: No such file or directory /usr/include/c++/4.0.0/iosfwd:45:29: error: bits/c++locale.h: No such file or

On 29 February 2012 09:35, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > I still think we can do more, but it's already much faster than the existing LLVM one except for the issue Tobias pointed out w/ modulo-4 key sizes. I'm going to investigate this OK, but this is a VERY big exception! Almost any non-string data anyone wants to hash will be a multiple of 4 bytes in

I've tried llvm 2.8 and 2.9, but they both have problems with #include <iosfwd>. Any pointers to what this might be? /usr/include/c++/4.5/iosfwd:39:10: fatal error: 'bits/c++config.h' file not found #include <bits/c++config.h> -- Øyvind Harboe - Can Zylin Consulting help on your project? US toll free 1-866-980-3434 / International +47 51 87 40 27 http://www.zylin.com/

On Dec 21, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > 2009/12/21 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: >> Hi All, >> >> A few of us got together and started an official LLVM (and its sub- >> projects) blog: >> http://blog.llvm.org/ > > Is it online? I cannot open it. If it's online, I highly suspect it's > blocked by the GFW. Yep, it's

At first I'll try the simplest strategy: put the instruction in the machine BB corresponding to the LLVM BB where it comes from. To implement this, I plan to add an operand to non-passive node which points to the BasicBlockSDNode which the node belongs to. Another idea is to use a side map to map each node to its block. But I guess it's difficult to keep the map consistent when

I am trying to build a DAG for a whole function. The first problem I met is to assign a user for the last instruction of each basic block, be it BRCOND or other node. There is no natural user for such nodes. Without user, it will be removed in later phases. My idea is to use it as chain for nodes in the next basic block. Is this reasonable? -Zhongxing Xu -------------- next part -------------- An

Hi all, We did some benchmarks on code size with clang, gcc 4.5, and open64. Clang performed second in the test. The benchmark is CSiBE. Clang can't compile the linux kernel (some inline asm not supported) and replaypc (error: use of unknown builtin '__builtin_next_arg'). The concrete results are attached. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote: > When built using the guidelines in the README.LLVM to use the system's > libstdc++ I get the following types of errors whenever I try to use the > standard library (say by running the front end test suite in llvm/test): > > /usr/include/c++/4.0.0/cmath:49:28: error: bits/c++config.h: No such file or > directory >