similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm 2.4 release notes draft

Hi Nicolas, thanks for your detailed answer! Now I understand the issues a little better. I'm going to install LLVM + Vmkit and try it out using JNI. Regarding the garbage collector, do you think that the Garbage Collection ABI of C++11 could be implemented in a way compatible to the JVM's garbage collector? http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#gc-abi Perhaps this could make

Hi Bruno, On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Bruno Daniel <abml at mailoo.org> wrote: > Dear developers, > > Are there any benchmarks for the performance of Java Native Interface (JNI) > calls in VMKit? Since VMKit is based on LLVM which can also run C++ code > (maybe in the same just-in-time compiler?) I guess calls from Java to C++ > and > back could be much faster

Thanks all, I've incorporated all the feedback so far: http://llvm.org/ChrisLLVM/projects/llvm-www/releases/1.8/docs/ReleaseNotes.html -Chris On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Bil wrote: > On Aug 8, 2006, at 10:28 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> Here's the first draft of the LLVM 1.8 release notes. Please take a look >> and send me any comments

On Aug 8, 2006, at 10:28 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > Hi All, > > Here's the first draft of the LLVM 1.8 release notes. Please take > a look and send me any comments or feedback you have: > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html > Trivial changes: * Most of LLVM is now built with "-pedantic", ensuring better portability to more C++ Compilers. Probably

> Please take a look: > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html GCC4.0-based llvm-gcc front-end section: Replace the second "in addition" with something else. "If you can use it, llvm-gcc4 is offers significant new functionality": remove is "In 1.8, it will be removed, replaced with the new SPARC backend." and replaced (no comma) "now have initial

Hello Chris Tue, 8 Aug 2006 10:28:44 -0700 (PDT) you wrote: > Here's the first draft of the LLVM 1.8 release notes. Please take a > look and send me any comments or feedback you have: > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html I think list of platforms should include "Intel and AMD machines running on Win32 using MinGW libraries (native)". Or something like this. -- With

misspellings: What's new, 1st paragraph: "nightly tester <http://llvm.org/nightlytest/>, llvm-config enhancEments"; 've found nothing wrong except of it :) On 8/8/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > Here's the first draft of the LLVM 1.8 release notes. Please take a look > and send me any comments or feedback you

On 11.05.2012, at 22:55, Bill Wendling wrote: > Hi all! > > Please remember to update the release notes! We're getting close to the release date, and we need the notes to be up-to-date. I added some bigger picture notes to http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html this morning, but we're still missing a lot of text, specifically: - clang: clang has it's own release notes

Hi All, Here's the first draft of the LLVM 1.8 release notes. Please take a look and send me any comments or feedback you have: http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html Thanks! -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/

Please take a look: http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/

Dear developers, Are there any benchmarks for the performance of Java Native Interface (JNI) calls in VMKit? Since VMKit is based on LLVM which can also run C++ code (maybe in the same just-in-time compiler?) I guess calls from Java to C++ and back could be much faster than in Sun's JVM which has extremely slow C++ -> Java callbacks. If this was the case, this would be a big advantage of

Hi Everyone, It is getting to be that time again. I've scoured llvm-commits and collected a list of some of the major features we've developed since the last status update (from Feb 21). Please take a look and send me (off list) additions, feedback, corrections, etc. As usual, if I missed something, it's probably because there is such a huge amount of stuff happening,

Hi All, The first draft of the release notes are now done (many thanks to Tanya for pulling together info from the announcements): http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html If you have comments/feedback, please let me know, or - better yet - just commit improvements to mainline :) -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/

Hello ??? I I've created a draft for the Release Notes for CentOS 7.7 at https://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7.1908 ??? Manuel

Hi All, Producing release notes at the end of the release is a becoming more of a problem as the project grows. I've been doing this by going through all of the LLVM commits since the last release and pulling out things that I find interesting and potentially impactful to people. However, as the project grows and there are more commits, this has been becoming less and less practical. To

Chris, Here's my review notes: 1. In the Known problems section you identify PR656 as a known problem. However, this bug is resolved and in January you reported that you verified it on Solaris. So, one of two things needs to happen. Either remove this item from the release notes, or re-open the bug and tell me what still breaks. 2. It seems that several items from the original DRAFT email

Hi Everyone, LLVM 2.3 is now officially released! You can download it from http://llvm.org/releases/ or view the release notes here: http://llvm.org/releases/2.3/docs/ReleaseNotes.html LLVM 2.3 includes many bug fixes, vastly improved support for the X86-64 ABI, support for SSE 4.1 on X86 chips, support for functions that return multiple results in memory, a new 'llvmc' tool,

Hi All, With 2.9 starting to make its way out into the world, it is time to start poking at the release notes. I plan to make a pass through llvm-commits to cull some of the major changes into bullets, but am already behind and insanely busy with other stuff over the next week. If you have commit access, I'd really appreciate it if you could take a pass through llvm/docs/ReleaseNotes.html

Sorry about the direct post.... >Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 08:38:39 -0500 >To: "Chris Boyd" <Chris.Boyd@usit.ie> >From: Eric Hines <eehines@comcast.net> >Subject: RE: [Samba] Not able to join domain > >At 04/06/06 08:13, you wrote: >>I've tried that and now I get "Access denied" instead "cannot find >>user". Also I'm

On Friday 21 September 2007, Chris Lattner wrote: > In addition to this, I've checked in the first draft of the release > notes into llvm/docs/ReleaseNotes.html (http://llvm.org/docs/ > ReleaseNotes.html). The release notes mention llvm-gcc 4.2, but the prerelease only included llvm-gcc 4.0. Is the final release going to include 4.0 or 4.2 or both? Bye, Maarten --------------