similar to: [LLVMdev] Native Static Compilers Compatible with LLVM

> I've tried compiling with tinycc, and assembling with yasm, and fasm even > with intel syntax. I'm just wondering what available compilers and > assemblers there are without trying every one of them. gas -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

I made some researches how llvm, possibly with other tools, can be a full backend for compiler writers (with the final result being an executable file or dynamic linked library). Here are the results: A. Assemblers When I saw that the I86 target for llvm with the Intel syntax targets MASM (I tested with the MASM version from http://www.masm32.com/ ), it was a bad surprise for me. This is

Hey, I've been trying this for a couple days now, finding different assemblers and trying different options but I can't figure it out.. I must be missing something very obvious. I got a simple "hello world" app in llvm, making the .bc file using 'llvm-as test.llvm -o=test.bc' works fine. then I can use llvm-ld to make an executable which then runs fine (although not

Van Dijck, Tom wrote: > Hey, > > I've been trying this for a couple days now, finding different assemblers and trying different options but I can't figure it out.. > I must be missing something very obvious. > > I got a simple "hello world" app in llvm, making the .bc file using 'llvm-as test.llvm -o=test.bc' works fine. > then I can use llvm-ld to

It would be nice to be able to use clang/llvm without GNU toolchain dependencies. Just out of curioisty what does the --x86-asm-syntax=intel actually mean then? Does this not get used? Is this a different syntax than the AT&T variety (forgive me if this is an obvious question)? I tried downloading FASM last night and it seemed handle some of the output, the one thing it didn't like was

> > The more important question is: why would you want to do that? What > problem are you trying to solve? As weird as it sounds, I'm looking for multiplatform assembly languages. I want to learn assembly, but I want my knowledge and code to carry over no matter which operating system I'm using. I regularly use Windows, Mac, and Linux, and I don't want to have to rewrite my

On Mon, 12 May 2008, Lokesh Kumar wrote: > I am just curious to know when will the llvm-db be released. I hope I > am posting in the right forum. In the latest release 2.2, the llvm-db > binary doesn't appear to load the symbol table or debug the bytecode. > It spits out a message saying that this feature is still not > implemented. There is no current plan (that I know of) to

Hi all, I am just curious to know when will the llvm-db be released. I hope I am posting in the right forum. In the latest release 2.2, the llvm-db binary doesn't appear to load the symbol table or debug the bytecode. It spits out a message saying that this feature is still not implemented. Thanks & Regards, -Lokesh -- "It is not God that is worshipped but the group or authority

On Jan 28, 2010, at 11:51 AM, Dustin Laurence wrote: > On 01/28/2010 11:41 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >> >> The required efforts equal to ones required to write new assembler. >> "Too weak to be usable" means "it's not possible to represent many >> important constructs with masm/nasm/fasm". > > Wow. It's perhaps too much of a

Hi Matthew, On Feb 15, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Matthew Huck wrote: > Hi, > It doesn't compile with yasm, or nasm Where did you get the idea that "Intel syntax" means NASM? LLVM actually produces assembly files that can be fed to GAS, or to LLVM's MC framework. (In fact, it's missing a .intel_syntax directive so GAS knows it needs to assemble instructions according to

On 01/28/2010 11:41 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > > The required efforts equal to ones required to write new assembler. > "Too weak to be usable" means "it's not possible to represent many > important constructs with masm/nasm/fasm". Wow. It's perhaps too much of a distraction, but I'm curious about the details of this. It's probably because

> Regarding the pecoff support - FASM comes with complete source and > what appears to be a BSD license. It outputs to pecoff. Assuming the > FASM code is readable and reasonably understandable, could this code Scratch all that, my mistake, it's all assembly. Cheers Jim

Hi, The problem is modern c++. I can have a reasonable system boostrape-ed with (tinycc/alternative C compiler), but only in the gcc world since a modern c++ compiler is only bootsrape-able from near any C compiler there. clang and llvm are unable to do it. That why I would need to get 2 gccs: "any C compiler" -> gcc 4.7.4 -> gcc recent_version -> llvm. On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at

Hi, It doesn't compile with yasm, or nasm (reports invalid combination of opcode and operands), and mov _x,EAX is meaningless as _x is just a label (an numeric constant that happens to be an address), so it would have to be dereferenced to get to the memory at that address, otherwise it's like saying mov 0x12341234, EAX Now, my asm skills are not that great, so I'm prepared to be

I'm still not catching on to the "new" of CentOS 8 yum install yasm Last metadata expiration check: 0:01:32 ago on Sat 05 Oct 2019 12:46:16 PM EDT. No match for argument: yasm Error: Unable to find a match yum install yasm-devel Last metadata expiration check: 0:01:37 ago on Sat 05 Oct 2019 12:46:16 PM EDT. No match for argument: yasm-devel Error: Unable to find a match yum

Hello > Does anybody have an idea of roughly how much effort is required to make > intel asm printer to be usable? If it is within weeks, probably I can give > it a try. The required efforts equal to ones required to write new assembler. "Too weak to be usable" means "it's not possible to represent many important constructs with masm/nasm/fasm". -- With best

Hi, I'm in the process of adding a X86 ASM Printer for outputting the asm in a style that Yasm can take without any post processing. Yasm's format is very close to that of intel. I was wondering if my approach is correct: I've made a custom MCAsmStreamer to remove some of the COFF symbol directives that yasm doesn't understand. I've made a X86YasmInstPrinter, and added it

Hello. Is there a way to output native assembly from llvm-ld to FASM? Also when I tried to compile C code generated by llc with TCC, it complained about not having the alloca.h header. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090406/c3243719/attachment.html>

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 07:15:39PM +0100, Renato Golin wrote: > On 12 October 2016 at 18:37, <sylvain.bertrand at gmail.com> wrote: > > Suggestion is not clear answer. How such a decision taken? Is there a board of > > people which have to vote to valid the choice of minimal gcc (and clang) version > > effective? > > We don't have such process, unfortunately.

Just for the interest of discussion, I find it completely weird and interesting that GCC needs to build itself 3 times to fully bootstrap. Has there been any interest in looking at a single compile build? I don't exactly know the limitations, but my naive thinking is that C++14 compiler source parsed by C++14 capable compiler and codegen'd to C99 (or older) source should make it compilable