similar to: [LLVMdev] BasicBlock tracking breaks trunk

----- Original Message ---- > From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> > To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > Cc: Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es>; LLVM Developers Mailing List ><llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Fri, January 14, 2011 4:39:57 PM > Subject: Re: Circular Deps from CMake build using makefile > > Samuel Crow <samuraileumas

Hello Óscar, This time the autotools version of LLVM trunk build with Clang trunk compiled in Debug+Asserts mode without complaint with --enable-bindings=none. I suspect this makes something fishy looking with the CMake build. Do you need logfiles from configure? Thanks again, --Sam ----- Original Message ---- > From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> > To: Samuel Crow

Hello Óscar, The single-threaded build failed the same place as the double threaded build failed which is the same place I just indicated in my previous post. The ../llvm/configure script version failed with OCaml building with about 600 assembler errors since I built it in AMD64 mode. (Oops.) Should I disable OCaml from the configure script and try again? Assembler error, input left in

Hi Mike-M, Thanks for the help. It seems I'll have to just download the precompiled binaries since I only have 1 Gig in the entire system I'm using. --Sam ----- Original Message ---- > From: mike-m <mikem.llvm at gmail.com> > To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > Sent: Wed, May 5, 2010 3:36:34 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Another bad binutils? >

Hi Chris, I was thinking that CreateValueName() was the way to add a symbol to a symbol table. Perhaps I'm thinking about this wrong. Here's what I've got: I've got a string generated by the parser which is constant. I need to add it to the symbol table so that, on starting the second pass of my compiler, I can dump all of the string constants to be generated as code. I

Hi, I've developed editor prototype for TableGen files (td). It is Eclipse plugin based on IMP project (The IDE Meta-Tooling Platform). Editor has outline, folding, coloring, go to definition, etc. As any prototype, editor has some limitations (e.g. no cross-file indexing). If there is any interest to such tool I will improve it a bit and then publish. Also considering llvm asm (ll) editing

Forgot to CC the list, sorry. ----- Forwarded Message ----- > From: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > To: FlyLanguage <flylanguage at gmail.com> > Cc: > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 10:40 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] RTTI gone in 3.0? > > Hi FlyLanguage, > > I thought LLVM disabled RTTI a long time ago.  It was just too slow. > > --Sam >

Hi again, My point is that your code could not be written in C++ at this time because the only complete compiler for C++ is LLVM-GCC. It will do little endian optimizations on your x86 box and make the resultant bitcode file not work on the ARM processor. It is possible to write an endian-agnostic bitcode file but I don't think all modern LLVM compilers support it. Also the FAQ also

Hello Anton, Our main.bc was generated with the following command line: llvm-g++ -Illvm\include -D__STDC_LIMIT_MACROS -D__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS -c -emit-llvm -omain.bc main.cpp The amos.bc file was generated by our experimental llvm-peg parser generator whose internal workings are assembled internally using LLVM Assembly. The parser generator links a C++ library bitcode with C bindings called

----- Original Message ---- > From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> > To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Wed, January 5, 2011 5:00:00 PM > Subject: Re: Build problems and workarounds with CMake and XCode > > Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> writes: > >

I don't think I quite understand this... suppose for example you're trying to use an LLVM-based toolchain running on an x86 PC to write code for a device that uses an ARM processor in big endian mode, so you tell the LLVM code generator "generate code for ARM, big endian"... are you saying the optimizer will actually assume the target device is little endian because the

Hi Sam, Thanks for your reply. I am implementing my research (http://www.it.usyd.edu.au/~suri/Detecting%20Buffer%20Over.pdf), a translation of LLVM to a simple non-deterministic language to detect buffer overflows. It involves (1) printing a control flow graph of basic blocks of a function (easily done) (2) translating each llvm statement to a corresponding data flow language (needs ASTs to

Wenbin Zhang wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Criswell" <criswell at illinois.edu> > To: "Wenbin Zhang" <zhangwen at cse.ohio-state.edu> > Cc: <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 5:09 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] how to check whether from basicblock A we can go to > basicblock B within the same

Whoops, phone rang and I forgot to cc to the list before I typed the message. ----- Forwarded Message ---- > From: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > To: Ruben Van Boxem <vanboxem.ruben at gmail.com> > Sent: Wed, January 5, 2011 3:38:21 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] include/Config/config.h discrepancies between CMake and >autofoo builds > > > >

----- Original Message ----- From: "John Criswell" <criswell at illinois.edu> To: "Wenbin Zhang" <zhangwen at cse.ohio-state.edu> Cc: <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 5:09 PM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] how to check whether from basicblock A we can go to basicblock B within the same function? > Wenbin Zhang wrote: >> Dear all,

----- Original Message ---- > From: Kenneth Uildriks <kennethuil at gmail.com> > To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > Cc: OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com>; LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Thu, November 19, 2009 12:22:55 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] fastcc and ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction() > > >

[ 73%] Regenerating /Users/samuraicrow/Documents/workspace/llvm-trunk-build/tools/llvm-config/LibDeps.txt.tmp [ 73%] Updating /Users/samuraicrow/Documents/workspace/llvm-trunk-build/tools/llvm-config/LibDeps.txt if necessary... [ 73%] Checking for cyclic dependencies between LLVM libraries. find-cycles.pl: Circular dependency between *.a files: find-cycles.pl: libLLVMAsmPrinter.a

Wenbin Zhang wrote: > Dear all, > Is there a way to check whether we can go from A to B within a > function when I'm writing a pass? I assume you are asking whether control flow can pass from BasicBlock A to BasicBlock B. In that case, yes: all you need to do is look at the terminator instruction of BasicBlock A and see if it can branch to BasicBlock B. There's a new indirect

I don't think you can. The BasicBlock is a member of MachineBasicBlock. It is not inherited, so it cannot be cast. The number of the MachineBasicBlock is not the same as any BasicBlock values. So MachineFunction::getMachineBasicBlock( BasicBlock::{get the number} ) cannot work. I do not see much in the basic block which can identify it. So you can search for it. typedef struct findBlock {

Also note: there may be multiple MachineBasicBlock's for a single BasicBlock. - David M On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Jeff Kunkel <jdkunk3 at gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think you can. > > The BasicBlock is a member of MachineBasicBlock. It is not inherited, > so it cannot be cast. The number of the MachineBasicBlock is not the > same as any BasicBlock values.