similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm ocaml bindings

Hi, thanks Chris and Gordon for the fantasic infrastructure and ocaml bindings and Erick for the prompt response! I'm looking to use LLVM to write program analyses for C/C++ programs, but to use Ocaml to write the analyses. I did see there were bindings for iterating over: * functions in a module [iter_functions] * basic blocks in a functions [iter_blocks] * instructions in a block

On 2008-12-30, at 21:07, Ranjit Jhala wrote: > thanks Chris and Gordon for the fantasic infrastructure and ocaml > bindings and Erick for the prompt response! > > I'm looking to use LLVM to write program analyses for > C/C++ programs, but to use Ocaml to write the analyses. > I did see there were bindings for iterating over: > > * functions in a module

Dear LLVMers, I wrote a new proposal, to improve the static array bounds checking in SAFEcode, as follows: Improving static array bounds checking in SAFEcode ================================================== Objective --------- the main objective of this project is to improve the static array bounds checking engine used in SAFECode. It was written after the open project at

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:49 AM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>wrote: > On 3/30/12 1:08 PM, Raphael Ernani Rodrigues wrote: > > Dear LLVMers, > > My name is Raphael Ernani, and I am doing my MsC at the Federal > University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. I have been using LLVM for a > while, and I would like to participate in this year's Summer of Code. >

Dear LLVMers, My name is Raphael Ernani, and I am doing my MsC at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. I have been using LLVM for a while, and I would like to participate in this year's Summer of Code. One particular idea, in your "open projects" page caught my eye, and I decided to write a proposal about it. The line that I liked in the page was "Create an LLVM

Hello Danny Travis, I am assuming you are using generic Samba 2.2.3a version. We came across the problem and you can fix it by setting the cache variable on the devnm() system cal to 1. Just set the last parameter to the devnm() call in smbd/quotas.c to 1. ################################### # ./samba2.2/source/smbd/quotas.c # ################################### 912a913,919 > #ifdef

On 3/30/12 1:08 PM, Raphael Ernani Rodrigues wrote: > Dear LLVMers, > > My name is Raphael Ernani, and I am doing my MsC at the Federal > University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. I have been using LLVM for a > while, and I would like to participate in this year's Summer of Code. > One particular idea, in your "open projects" page caught my eye, and I > decided to

Ranjit, Thanks for the follow up, the open source community is incredible. Long story short, I was able to install through the repositories. Then cleaned up some other issues (tcl/tk, java and others) and did a custom install of 2.10. Which brings me to another question, when yum installed R2.11 as an update, did it use the settings from the original 2.10 repository installation or did it

Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed Warning: (file.scr). Warning: Please read the "VirusWarning.txt" attachment(s) for more information. -------------- next part -------------- This is a message from the E-Mail Virus Protection Service ---------------------------------------------------------- The original e-mail attachment "file.scr" was believed

On 4/3/12 9:54 AM, Raphael Ernani Rodrigues wrote: > Dear LLVMers, > > I wrote a new proposal, to improve the static array bounds checking in > SAFEcode, as follows: > > > > Improving static array bounds checking in SAFEcode > ================================================== > > > Objective > --------- > > the main objective of this project is to

--- src/inspect-apps.c | 13 ++++++++++++- src/inspect-fs-windows.c | 6 ++++++ src/journal.c | 5 +++++ 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/inspect-apps.c b/src/inspect-apps.c index 20cf00a..8fbae9c 100644 --- a/src/inspect-apps.c +++ b/src/inspect-apps.c @@ -35,11 +35,22 @@ #include <sys/endian.h> #endif -/* be32toh is usually a macro

Hello everyone, I am using the OCaml binding to read and manipulate llvm bitcode and I have trouble to read the basic blocks of functions. The OCaml functions iter_blocks and fold_left_blocks are always behaving as if the list of blocks is empty, whatever the input file. Also, if I dump the following function: define i32 @add(i32 %x, i32 %y) nounwind uwtable ssp { %1 = alloca i32, align 4

The way we used posix_fadvise was wrong, and yet right! Rich.

--- pxzcat.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) diff --git a/pxzcat.c b/pxzcat.c index 9bcdc36..55ccfc0 100644 --- a/pxzcat.c +++ b/pxzcat.c @@ -44,10 +44,11 @@ #include <sys/types.h> #include <error.h> #include <errno.h> #include <getopt.h> #include <pthread.h> +#include <linux/falloc.h> #include <lzma.h> #define DEBUG

Hi all, I am using the OCaml binding and I get the following error with the function "Llvm.has_metadata": Assertion failed: (isa<X>(Val) && "cast<Ty>() argument of incompatible type!"), function cast, file .../llvm-3.2.src/include/llvm/Support/Casting.h, line 208. Abort trap: 6 I am using the latest 3.2 release from the LLVM download page and this is a

How can I tell who and when users logged in to a Samba server? The clients are a mixture of Win9x computers. I want to compile a chart of computer use by user.

Hello again (I hope it's not too much to have two questions in one day :), Currently I'm testing quota support on Linux system with kernel 2.4.18 + XFS 1.1 patch + Samba 2.2.7 (--with-quota compiled) and I went into one really unpleasant problem when accesing Samba share from Windows 2000 SP3 with Total commander 5.5. When user reach soft limit, then he'll get a warning message

Maybe this has been asked many times, but I could not find it in the list archive (in this case could someone please address me to the right thread?) I've an XP professional client (SP1) connected to a 2.2.7a samba server running on a redhat 6.2 box (kernel 2.2.22). I can log on and access samba shares, but the XP box keeps losing these connections. Log file just tell me that:

On Mar 3, 2010, at 20:44, Erick Tryzelaar wrote: > > I've pretty much finished exposing all I wanted to llvm-c and the > ocaml bindings for the soon to be released 2.7. Does anyone need any > other functions exposed before the code freeze on the 7th? Oh hey... I remember now. There is one thing I probably won't get around to doing myself until after the code freeze. (*

Hi Everyone, When I compile llvm 2.8 with the option --disable-optimized --enable-assertions on Leopard with Ocaml 3.11, I get the following fatal error when it starts to build the ocaml docs. llvm[1]: Installing HTML documentation llvm[1]: Building ocamldoc documentation llvm[3]: Documenting llvm.odoc llvm[3]: Documenting llvm_bitreader.odoc llvm[3]: Documenting llvm_bitwriter.odoc llvm[3]: