similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm/llvm-gcc-4.2 svn still produces -Wformat/-Wformat-security

Hi Jack, Because of the new changes and the fact that we have only 2 days before branching for 2.5, please retest the Fortran front end as soon as you can to see if the problem has been resolved. Thanks! -bw On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.med.uc.edu> wrote: > The current llvm/llvm-gcc-4.2 svn when built on > i686-apple-darwin9 still produces the

Chris and Bill, I have tested the proposed patch from... http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-August/016490.html under i686-apple-darwin9 and it solves the problems building gfortran from llvm svn. The resulting compiler works fine so can we get that patch in before 2.4 is release? Jack ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm svn. I find

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.msbb.uc.edu> wrote: > Chris and Bill, > I have tested the proposed patch from... > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-August/016490.html > > under i686-apple-darwin9 and it solves the problems building gfortran > from llvm svn. The resulting compiler works fine so can we get that > patch

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 05:38:30PM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.msbb.uc.edu> wrote: > > Chris and Bill, > > I have tested the proposed patch from... > > > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-August/016490.html > > > > under i686-apple-darwin9 and it solves the problems

On Oct 30, 2008, at 11:02 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Oct 30, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: >> ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm >> svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that >> I get a series of warning messages... >> >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/

On Oct 30, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: > ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm > svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that > I get a series of warning messages... > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ > ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option

Looking back through the commits to llvm-gcc-4.2/trunk/gcc/config/i386/darwin.h, I see a total backout of format related warnings in r56923 followed by the reapplication of r569065 with a fix (r56946)... -- llvm-gcc-4.2/trunk/gcc/config/i386/darwin.h 2008/10/01 17:38:40 56923 +++ llvm-gcc-4.2/trunk/gcc/config/i386/darwin.h 2008/10/02 06:16:08 56946 @@ -101,6 +101,8 @@ %{!mmacosx-version-min=*:

Bill Wendling wrote: > Hi Jack, > > Because of the new changes and the fact that we have only 2 days > before branching for 2.5, please retest the Fortran front end as soon > as you can to see if the problem has been resolved. Hi Bill. Thanks for working on this! Unfortunately, I'm getting this warning now: $ llvm-g++ helloworld.c cc1plus: warning: -Wformat-security

On Jan 18, 2009, at 5:11 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: > The current llvm/llvm-gcc-4.2 svn when built on > i686-apple-darwin9 still produces the bogus warnings... > > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ > ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat-security" is valid for > C/C++/ObjC/ObjC++

On Oct 31, 2008, at 9:44 AM, Devang Patel wrote: >>> f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ >>> ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran > Try this not so elegant and untested patch. I'd not expect this to work for Ada, java or Pascal.

On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:38:50AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > On Oct 31, 2008, at 9:40 AM, Jack Howarth wrote: >> However in current llvm svn, when I compile code with llvm-gfortran, I >> get these warning >> flags passed by default so that I get bogus warnings of... >> >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/ >>

> This means that I don't have a working llvm-gcc with TOT either. I get the same thing on x86-32. Ciao, Duncan.

On 2008-10-01 18:55, Duncan Sands wrote: >> This means that I don't have a working llvm-gcc with TOT either. >> > > I get the same thing on x86-32. > > Ciao, > > Duncan. > HAVE_STDLIB_H is not defined, which causes a 'char* malloc()' definition in cplus-dem.c. >From config.log: configure:8421: checking for stdlib.h configure:8461: result:

The curent llvm svn (r54623) is unable to link the gfortran compiler in llvm-gcc-4.2 svn. I am getting the error... c++ -g -O2 -mdynamic-no-pic -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-format-attribute -mdynamic-no-pic -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -o f951 \

Anyone know what to do about this: make[4]: Leaving directory `/proj/llvm/llvm-test-1/External/SPEC/CFP2000/173.applu' make[4]: Entering directory `/proj/llvm/llvm-test-1/External/SPEC/CFP2000/178.galgel' /usr/bin/f95 -w -S -O2 /opt/spec/CPU2000v1.3.1/benchspec//CFP2000/178.galgel/src/modules.f90 -o modules.c -fixed -kind=byte -dcfuns -dusty f95: unrecognized option '-kind=byte'

I am finding that llvm 2.8 rc3 with dragonegg svn built against current gcc-4_5-branch doesn't appear to allow gfortran to use -ffast-math. Attempting to compile code using the dragonegg plugin under gcc 4.5.2 with that option produces the error... f951: Unknown command line argument '--enable-finite-only-fp-math'. Try: 'f951 -help' The standard gcc 4.5.2 gfortran compiler

cannot exec 'f951': No such file or directory Reply-To: Hi all, I'm using R on an Suse Linux system. Since Hmisc and Design need both fortran, I installed gfortran (through rpm). However, I still get an error message, namely: gfrotran: error cannot exec 'f951': No such file or directory And the installation is cancelled. I tried solving the problem through googling it, and

hi. Is there interest in enhancing the objc++ compiler to make objc mechanisms friendly to the newer features of c++? For instance... 1) making blocks movable so that they can capture things like unique_ptr<> and still be moved off the stack 2) making @property declarations work with move-only types like unique_ptr<> 3) enabling std::weak_ptr<> to weakly store an objc pointer

Did something change with exception handling recently? A bunch of lit bots are showing slower compile times for many tests. Ciao, Duncan. On 20/06/12 07:53, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: > > lab-mini-03__O0-g__clang_DEV__x86_64 test results > <http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/v4/nts/1283?compare_to=1278&baseline=999> > > Run Order Start Time Duration >

Hi Jack, > I am finding that llvm 2.8 rc3 with dragonegg svn built against current > gcc-4_5-branch doesn't appear to allow gfortran to use -ffast-math. Attempting > to compile code using the dragonegg plugin under gcc 4.5.2 with that option produces the error... > > f951: Unknown command line argument '--enable-finite-only-fp-math'. Try: 'f951 -help' >