similar to: [LLVMdev] Windows x64 support

HP, Sybase and DM Review present Converting Compliance Cost into Business Advantage ? A Roadmap to Real-Time Data Analysis Date: March 18, 2004 Time: 1:00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. EST Compliance with industry and government regulations is a mandatory cost of doing business. Architecting systems to handle reporting requirements ? often on five to ten year's worth of detailed business data ? can

Hi all... I'm looking once again at the Syslinux roadmap. It seems to me that we're going to have a very hard time making Syslinux 4.00 be the full-featured everything-in-C release I had hoped for, or perhaps more specifically, that it is justifiable to sit on the current filesystems-in-C code waiting for the rest. That would probably mean productizing the transitional COM32R module

Hello, Chuck > I've had a look at the stubs before and I think I'm circumventing them > in the example program since I populate the table and compile the > functions in the order so that things never need to be done lazily, but > I'll look further. Well, anyway stubs are definitely wrong from windows64 and this should be fixed, otherwise funny stuff can happen from time to

Hello, > If anybody has an idea of how to fix this (other than using another > version of gcc because I am sick of compiling), I would appreciate. I > can offer backtraces or shell access if anybody is interested, just > ask me what you need. This was fixed couple of months ago. Please consider using current svn top of tree, not 2.3 release. -- WBR, Anton Korobeynikov

I'm mainly just curious, but what version of dovecot is considered to be stable enough to be running in a production environment? We're running the 0.99.13 version shipped with FC3 and, while experiencing great performance gains over UW-IMAP, we have hit a couple of snags here and there (random and infrequent characters at the beginning of a mailbox, periodic duplication of a message

Hi, I'm using LLVM for JIT compilation of shaders for my ray tracer (http://www.indigorenderer.com). My primary development target is 32 bit and 64 bit Windows. JIT compilation of shaders is working great for x86 code, but for x64 code LLVM doesn't really work, due to ABI incompatibilties in the form of calling convention errors with x64 windows, I think. Anyway, my questions are as

2008/9/21 Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru>: > Hello, > >> If anybody has an idea of how to fix this (other than using another >> version of gcc because I am sick of compiling), I would appreciate. I >> can offer backtraces or shell access if anybody is interested, just >> ask me what you need. > This was fixed couple of months ago. Please consider

Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> writes: >> When I asked about enhancing scheduler heuristics a month or so ago, I >> got a response about a MachineInstr scheduler and that that was the way >> of the LLVM future. Is that so? Is the ScheduleDAG going away? > > You sent a lengthy RFC on Apr 20 that demonstrated you aren't > following developments on trunk.

Oh, that's great. It wasn't clear from that page, at least not for me. :-( Having it clearly stated on the document would save me (and probably others) lots of time. Thanks for clarifying it. Any idea on the timeframe of implementation? *Michael Ulitskiy* Ace Innovative Networks, Inc. Main/SMS: 212-868-2366 Direct/SMS: 212-812-1203 https://www.aceinnovative.com On 7/6/23 12:47, Joshua

Hi Valery, On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 13:15 +0200, Valery Khamenya wrote: > Hi, > > where could one find any LLVM development roadmap for this > and perhaps next year? About the best "roadmap" we have is the list of enhancements in Bugzilla:

Hi Nicolas, > never got committed entirely so things are still broken. It should probably > be reopened, have my workaround committed, and then later a proper fix that > doesn't cost (a tiny bit of) performance could be done. This is only the tip of the iceberg, unfortunately. There are others more severe ABI incompatibilities. -- WBR, Anton Korobeynikov

Hi, Chris > If the assembler is a limitation, the best solution would be to add a > direct PECOFF writer. There is a start of direct ELF and Macho writers > already in the tree. They are not production quality, but could be a > useful place to start looking. Well, maybe. But in any case I doubt there will be 'open' support for CV debug format :) -- WBR, Anton

Hi, where could one find any LLVM development roadmap for this and perhaps next year? Especially would be interesting to know about * planned features for PS3 Cell processor -- as well as for Wii, Xbox360 CPUs * multithreading in general * possibly coming changes in major versioning and related issues * other interesting featuring comments on current status to above listed items are also

On May 8, 2012, at 3:02 PM, dag at cray.com wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As I've mentioned before we are doing some work on the LLVM scheduler to > improve it. Specifically, we are working to get loads and stores to > move past each other when possible. > > When I asked about enhancing scheduler heuristics a month or so ago, I > got a response about a MachineInstr

Hello, just for curiosity (I'm just finishing my degree), how much salary earn people in the field of compilers? 2008/8/27 Daniel M Gessel <gessel at apple.com> > Hi, > > Just wondering, is Cray still active on Chapel? Any timeframe to a > public release? > > Thanks, > > Dan > > On Aug 26, 2008, at 6:00 PM, David Greene wrote: > > > Hi all, >

Hi, Just wondering, is Cray still active on Chapel? Any timeframe to a public release? Thanks, Dan On Aug 26, 2008, at 6:00 PM, David Greene wrote: > Hi all, > > Wanted to let you know about some compiler work opportunities here > at Cray. > We're pushing LLVM in all sorts of interesting ways and there's lots > of work > inside and outside of LLVM to keep us

Hi everyone, As I've mentioned before we are doing some work on the LLVM scheduler to improve it. Specifically, we are working to get loads and stores to move past each other when possible. When I asked about enhancing scheduler heuristics a month or so ago, I got a response about a MachineInstr scheduler and that that was the way of the LLVM future. Is that so? Is the ScheduleDAG going

Hello, Evan > I am not sure if it has been tested on x86-64 Windows. > Anton, do you know? I don't think it was ever written (for vcpp). There is 32-bit stub only. -- WBR, Anton Korobeynikov

> The x86-64 one probably doesn't work for Winodws. That's likely the > issue. Well, x86-64 stub was never ported to intel assembler, I expect to see 32-bit one used on windows64. In general, the whole windows64 support is missed mainly due to crazy calling convetion invented by Microsoft. So, all calls from code being JITed to external functions will be clearly broken (if they

Hello, Chuck > Would my life be made fantastically simpler if I were using a different > calling convention for my callback functions on x64 running on Windows? Yes, surely. You can still use 'normal' x86-64 CC if you don't want to call any external functions from code being JITed. Also note a Win64 fixme in the X86CompilationCallback2 function, this can be your case. I think