similar to: [LLVMdev] C Compiler written in OCaml, Pointers Wanted

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Nyx <mcheva at cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > > Hello, > > For a course project, I am required to write a compiler for some language of > my choice, and this compiler has to be implemented in a functional language. > I have chosen create a *JIT* compiler for C source, and to implement my > compiler in OCaml using LLVM for the back-end. I have

On Wednesday 24 February 2010 03:58:03 Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > I think LLVM OCaml bindings do not support JIT too much. Can you elaborate on this? Several major projects are using OCaml's LLVM bindings to execute non-trivial code via JIT. -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Jon Harrop <jon at ffconsultancy.com> wrote: > On Wednesday 24 February 2010 03:58:03 Jianzhou Zhao wrote: >> I think LLVM OCaml bindings do not support JIT too much. > > Can you elaborate on this? I meant the OCaml bindings let OCaml call existing C++ LLVM routines, such as creating an execution engine, JIT-ing a function with existing JIT or

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Nyx <mcheva at cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > > Hello, > > For a course project, I am required to write a compiler for some language of > my choice, and this compiler has to be implemented in a functional language. > I have chosen create a *JIT* compiler for C source, and to implement my > compiler in OCaml using LLVM for the back-end. I have

On Wednesday 24 February 2010 13:26:33 Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Jon Harrop <jon at ffconsultancy.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday 24 February 2010 03:58:03 Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > >> I think LLVM OCaml bindings do not support JIT too much. > > > > Can you elaborate on this? > > I meant the OCaml bindings let OCaml call existing

I'm coding a JIT compiler for C source in OCaml, using LLVM. I'm pretty much done with the LLVM code generation. The problem is that I can't seem to call C library functions. I was told that all I needed to do to be able to link with libc functions was to declare them in my module and give them external linkage, but this does not seem to work. Please note that this is a JIT compiler. I

I tried running nm - D | grep "puts" on the binary compiled by the OCaml compiler. It outputs the following: 08161b00 T camlRuntime__rt_fputs_208 08161a20 T camlRuntime__rt_puts_198 U fputs I'm assuming this means that fputs is linked dynamically, and puts is not. I tried modifying my code to use fputs instead of puts instead, but had no success, however, I still get:

In C, on Linux, you would have to link your JIT compiler with -rdynamic or -Wl,-export-dynamic (they're synonyms). I'm not sure what the equivalent linker flag is for OCaml. You can see what symbols are available to the JIT with `nm -D`. On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Nyx <mcheva at cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > > I'm coding a JIT compiler for C source in OCaml, using LLVM.

>> You need to figure out how to pass -rdynamic to the linker, like I said before. http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/OCamlLangImpl7.html mentions it, but I don't know enough about the ocaml build process to say whether that'll work. I believe I'm already doing that, properly by passing -ccopt -rdynamic to ocamlopt: ocamlopt -cc g++ -ccopt -rdynamic -linkall $(LIBFILES) -o alpha

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Nyx <mcheva at cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > >>> You need to figure out how to pass -rdynamic to the linker, like I > said before. http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/OCamlLangImpl7.html > mentions it, but I don't know enough about the ocaml build process to > say whether that'll work. > > I believe I'm already doing that, properly by

Hello All (to Ocaml List & CC LLVM list) As some might probably know, the LLVM compiler http://llvm.org/ has (at least in its latest SVN snapshot) a binding for Ocaml. This means that one could code in Ocaml some stuff (eg a JIT-ing compiler) which uses (and links with) LLVM libraries. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2007-November/011481.html

I'm having another play with LLVM using the OCaml bindings for a forthcoming OCaml Journal article and I have a couple of remarks: Firstly, I noticed that the execute engine is very slow, taking milliseconds to call a JIT compiled function. Is this an inherent overhead or am I calling it incorrectly or is this something that can be optimized in the OCaml bindings? Secondly, I happened to

On Nov 26, 2007, at 13:27, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > As some might probably know, the LLVM compiler http://llvm.org/ has > (at least in its latest SVN snapshot) a binding for Ocaml. This > means that one could code in Ocaml some stuff (eg a JIT-ing > compiler) which uses (and links with) LLVM libraries. Yep! There are no bindings for the JIT (just for codegen), but it has

On 2008-09-05, at 23:26, Jon Harrop wrote: > I'm having another play with LLVM using the OCaml bindings for a > forthcoming > OCaml Journal article and I have a couple of remarks: > > Firstly, I noticed that the execute engine is very slow, taking > milliseconds to call a JIT compiled function. Is this an inherent > overhead or am I calling it incorrectly or is this

On Nov 25, 2007, at 11:49, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Sunday 25 November 2007 12:23, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> If ocamlc is on your path, then 'configure; make; make install' >> should install the bindings in your ocaml lib. > > Right. I hadn't noticed they were already installed after llvm "make > install" in: > > /usr/local/lib/ocaml/

On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Jon Harrop <jonathandeanharrop at googlemail.com> wrote: > Firstly, I noticed that the execute engine is very slow, taking milliseconds > to call a JIT compiled function. Is this an inherent overhead or am I calling > it incorrectly or is this something that can be optimized in the OCaml > bindings? What is the signature of the function you are

On Monday 10 December 2007 23:14, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On 2007-12-10, at 18:04, Sarah Thompson wrote: > >> Is it reasonable for me to hack on this, or would you rather do it > >> yourself? (If the latter, you would be very much in my debt...) > > > > Or the other way around, or something. :) > > :) I'm adding it now. I'd really appreciate JIT

Hi Jon, On 2007-12-10, at 18:28, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Monday 10 December 2007 23:14, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> On 2007-12-10, at 18:04, Sarah Thompson wrote: >> >>>> Is it reasonable for me to hack on this, or would you rather do >>>> it yourself? (If the latter, you would be very much in my debt...) >>> >>> Or the other way

Hi! I just took another look at the LLVM project and it has come along in leaps and bounds since I last looked. I've been working through the (awesome!) tutorial and am now really hyped about the project. I am particularly interested in using LLVM to write compilers for OCaml-like languages in OCaml-like languages. This requires some core functionality that would be generically useful:

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