similar to: [LLVMdev] Variable Attributes

On Sep 25, 2009, at 8:49 AM, C.J. Manville wrote: > I would like to modify the compiler to classify variables, which > will ultimately determine the position the variables are stored in > memory. What would be the best approach to accomplish this? > > I was thinking of modifying the lexer and parser to add a new > attribute and have the machine code generator handle

Nick Lewycky wrote: > Sanjiv.Gupta at microchip.com wrote: >> >> >> A common followup question is "but how do I link native libraries into >> my .bc file". You don't. A .bc file is llvm ir, you can't put a native >> binary library into a .bc (barring sticking it in as a string, etc). >> >> The build then looks like: >> >>

Hi. For weeks now I have problems compiling llvm from svn, compilation ends with llvm[2]: Compiling Lexer.cpp for Release build /home/borist/builds/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l: In function 'int llvmAsmlex()': /home/borist/builds/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l:278: error: 'PURE' was not declared in this scope /home/borist/builds/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l:279: error: 'CONST'

Sanjiv Gupta wrote: > Nick Lewycky wrote: >> Sanjiv.Gupta at microchip.com wrote: >>> >>> >>> A common followup question is "but how do I link native libraries into >>> my .bc file". You don't. A .bc file is llvm ir, you can't put a native >>> binary library into a .bc (barring sticking it in as a string, etc). >>>

Hello With the latest LLVM from Subversion (rev48737 from http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk) I'm getting make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/Lang/llvm/_Obj/lib/AsmParser' llvm[2]: Flexing Lexer.l llvm[2]: Compiling Lexer.cpp for Debug build /usr/src/Lang/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l: In function 'int llvmAsmlex()': /usr/src/Lang/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l:278: error:

>> Lexing is the one issue though. > > How do you mean? I think he's observing that a majority of the tutorial code is actually spent on the lexer and parser, not on the llvm-specific pieces. > I'm just fiddling around with it now. The lexer, parser and AST > written using > camlp4 might look something like this in OCaml: Sure, the existing tutorial would be

Is this the appropriate place for GSoC conversations? If I understand the proposal correctly, there should be a lexer (written in R) that exposes an API; that API would be used by segregated mini-parsers (Roclets) which do the dirty work of Roxygen -> {html, LaTeX, DocBook, ...} translation. The lexer should ship with a proof-of-concept Roclet. Have I missed anything?

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > Well, maybe, we should just change the Linux kernel instead of tweaking > our tokenizer too hard. > This is silly. Writing a simple and maintainable lexer is not hard (look e.g. at https://reviews.llvm.org/D10817). There are some complicated context-sensitive cases in linker scripts that break our approach

> Hmm..., the crux of not being able to lex arithmetic expressions seems to > be due to lack of context sensitivity. E.g. consider `foo*bar`. Could be a > multiplication, or could be a glob pattern. > > Looking at the code more closely, adding context sensitivity wouldn't be > that hard. In fact, our ScriptParserBase class is actually a lexer (look at > the interface; it

Hi everyone. Because there is still a little confusion about the huge document, I want to know what llvm can provide when we customize our new compiler? For example, a normal compiler includes lexer, parser, intermediate code generator , optimizer and target code generator. According to llvm documents, it seems that llvm can provide a better intermediate code presentation. And what else can it

Hello: I've been trying for days now to get igraph working on a debian sarge install. There does not appear to be any pre-built packages, and when I try and install within R, it blows up on the final linking, claiming its unable to find libgfortran (which IS installed, and IS working for all other users of the compiler). I started up R and ran: install.packages("igraph"). It

Hello, I would like to gather some ideas and opinions on how to make the default AsmLexer more flexible when dealing with Identifiers. When the lexer emits something as an "Identifier" (read. String of characters) it means that it needs to be parsed all at once in a single go, even if it contains elements that might be wanted to be parsed as separate entities. In that case it is needed

Hi, I'm having a hard time finding an answer to what I assume is a very basic idea. I'm trying to produce this llvm code using the LLVM api: %myString = alloca [13 x i8], i32 13 store [13 x i8] c"Hello world.\00", [13 x i8]* %myString %tmp1 = getelementptr [13 x i8]* %myString, i32 0, i32 0 %tmp2 = call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf( i8* %tmp1 ) nounwind A simple Hello

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > Sean, > > So as you noticed that linker script tokenization rule is not very trivial > -- it is context sensitive. The current lexer is extremely simple and > almost always works well. Improving "almost always" to "perfect" is not > high priority because we have many more high

I am unknown to all the stuff happening in and around LLVM, as i am interested in the project but had not time to dig in, yet. Just reading here and there a bit. But i wanted to share my 2 cents on the Lexer topic. I have written multiple lexer/parser for private purpose and recently one for our product to compile Mathematical expressions into an internal format for evaluation. So far i usually

On Sunday 25 November 2007 05:28, Aaron Gray wrote: > > On Sunday 25 November 2007 03:42, Christopher Lamb wrote: > >> Try this google query. I know there's been some discussion/work on > >> OCaml and LLVM. > >> > >> site:lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev OCaml interface > > > > I just rediscovered the OCaml bindings in bindings/ocaml

On 4/16/06, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote: > > I've put the pre-release tar balls here: > http://llvm.org/prereleases/1.7/ > The build failed on i686-pc-linux-gnu. llvm[2]: Flexing FileLexer.l llvm[2]: Compiling FileLexer.cpp for Release build /home/rogelio/Desktop/llvm/utils/TableGen/FileLexer.l: In function 'int Filelex()':

On Mar 15, 2010, at 8:15 PM, kalyan ponnala wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to understand LLVM. Can an expert tell me how to compare the kaleidoscope implementation with the LLVM's compiler implementation. I mean can anyone tell me about the lexer, parser, codegen related .cpp and .h files inside the LLVM solution project. I would like to understand the LLVM's compiler in the same

> This is fixed in CVS. You might consider upgrading to LLVM CVS, > especially if you are interested in looking at performance issues: several > important performance related patches have gone in since LLVM 1.2. OK, now i've really upgraded to CVS, but it looks like state of sources is "not compilable" :( indeed: *************************** Linking llc release executable

Hi, I am trying to understand LLVM. Can an expert tell me how to compare the kaleidoscope implementation with the LLVM's compiler implementation. I mean can anyone tell me about the lexer, parser, codegen related .cpp and .h files inside the LLVM solution project. I would like to understand the LLVM's compiler in the same way that the kaleidoscope compiler is explained. Thanks a lot.