similar to: [LLVMdev] Living on Clang

Hi, On Apr 14, 2010, at 10:51 PM, Douglas Gregor wrote: > Hello fellow LLVMers and Clangstas, > > We want to make Clang great, and we need your help! > > Helping is easy: just build Clang on your platform and start using it as your main compiler for LLVM and Clang development. Much of the Clang team has been living on Clang for at least several weeks already, and we've

I can't switch to clang on my project until it can handle boost headers. On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:17 AM, Rene Rebe <rene at exactcode.de> wrote: > Hi, > > On Apr 14, 2010, at 10:51 PM, Douglas Gregor wrote: > >> Hello fellow LLVMers and Clangstas, >> >> We want to make Clang great, and we need your help! >> >> Helping is easy: just build Clang

> We want to make Clang great, and we need your help! Doug, I don't see any type of selfbuild target in the LLVM top level makefile. This would be a useful way to automate the self build process. I've used similar mechanisms before on other compilers, where you can trivially invoke a three phase build (first you do a full build with your system compiler, then you use your built

How about building this in the CMake or auto* level we build a separate build script for it? I attache a simple version here. It does seem to work here. It's a shell script, which uses cmake for the building but it seems the second stage file works. I am not really sure why a third stage is needed, but it can be added quite easily. A windows version should be trivial to write (next week). A

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > The third stage is for comparing the output of clang (as compiled by > gcc) against clang (as compiled by clang). The whole process is: > > Stage 1: build clang with gcc > > Stage 2: build clang with the clang created by gcc > > Stage 3: build clang with the clang created by clang. > >

Hi All, I've finished the first draft of the 2.8 release notes: http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html Please feel free to commit improvements and enhancements. There are "a lot" of changes that went into 2.8, but I think I've scraped most of them out of the commits. However, it is also highly likely that I missed something, so if I missed your favorite feature, please speak

No, this is not the case. Just because you compile something to LLVM IR does not make the thing you compiled work on every architecture. You may even be able to retarget it to any architecture (it depends), but this in no way means the result will *actually work*. The LLVM IR generated by llvm-gcc is very architecture dependent. Theoretically you could make a C compiler that was mostly C

On Oct 21, 2008, at 2:27 AM, Jay Foad wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to use LLVM to compile and optimise code when I don't know > whether the target CPU is big- or little-endian. This would allow me > to create a single optimised LLVM bitcode binary of an application, > and then run it through a JIT compiler on systems of differening > endianness. Ok. > I realise that

does that mean .o generated with gcc (.c -> .s and .s -> .o) will not contain llvm ir? i meant, final kernel bitcode ir arch independent and can be JIT with any arch-specific backend. Is it not the case? thanks, ashish On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 8:08 PM, Ashish Bijlani > <ashish.bijlani at

Hi Chris, just spotted that the libc++ link in the 2.8 release notes is invalid, points to http://libc++.llvm.org/, should be ...libcxx... René On Oct 4, 2010, at 6:43 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > Hi All, > > I've finished the first draft of the 2.8 release notes: > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html > > Please feel free to commit improvements and enhancements.

Hi, I'd like to use LLVM to compile and optimise code when I don't know whether the target CPU is big- or little-endian. This would allow me to create a single optimised LLVM bitcode binary of an application, and then run it through a JIT compiler on systems of differening endianness. I realise that in general the LLVM IR depends on various characteristics of the target; I'd just

Hi all, today we had a performance issue transfering a big amount of data where one file was over 50GB. Rsync was tunneled over SSH and we expected the data to be synced within hours. However after over 10 hours the data is still not synced ... The sending box has rsync running with 60-80 % CPU load (2GHz Pentium 4) while the receiver is nearly idle. So far I had no acces to the poblematic

Hi all, I just wanted to temporarily make some new CMS I set up available to the public for testing on port 8080 of our web server forwarded via ssh to to my local, firewalled workstation: ssh me at some-host.tld -R 8080:localhost:80 However I had to notice that this only binds to the loopback interface and not to all. For -L there is the -g option to low connects to locally forwarded ports

On 04/14/2010 11:51 PM, Douglas Gregor wrote: > Hello fellow LLVMers and Clangstas, > > We want to make Clang great, and we need your help! > > Helping is easy: just build Clang on your platform and start using it as your main compiler for LLVM and Clang development. I'd love to, but this bug is a blocker for me: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=6795 Best regards, --Edwin

hello all: I have two machines (approx 50 miles apart) that I need to create a co-located backup solution for. One machine will serve as a central fileserver for an office, and every week a backup of that directory will be sent through the internet to a box I have here locally. I am aware of rsync being able to run over SSH, however I need this to be totally automated (SSH opening, passwords

Hi all, I'm currently reviewing if LLVM would be useful for a use case on our side, and run into a build problem on PPC64/Linux (x86, x86_64, and ppc build ok): the 2.5 release and trunk fail the same way, just the line number is differs by one, 2.5: llvm[2]: ======= Finished Linking Release Executable tblgen (without symbols) make[2]: Leaving directory

I have a simple backup shell script that I am using for backups. I have a problem which I think is a result of this error: rsync warning: some files vanished before they could be transferred (code 24) at main.c(789) Any command after the rsync never gets executed if I get the above error. The file system is very large and we have engineers working at all hours so it is rare that this would

hi everybody I have to do a lot of Anova with R and I would like to have another type of coefficients coding.. I explain. by default if I have 2 temperatures for an experience. 100°C or 130°C and I want to see the temperature effect on the presure I want to estimate the coefficient of each temperature. I will obtain ,with the anova, juste one coefficients for example +3,56 (for 100°C), and the

And the code of the Linux kernel compiled by LLVM is also very arch depended, despite any loader and hw access will not work inside the standard LLVM JIT, all the MMU and low-level access stuff will make no sense on a machine other than what was enabled while compiling the kernel. E.g. you would need a whole virtualized HW architecture ala Qemu (et al.) along the JIT. Of course in theory one

FYI, I just successfully performed a 3-stage bootstrap with stage2/stage3 object file comparison on x86_64-apple-darwin16 for llvm/clang/clang-tools-extra/compiler-rt/libcxx/openmp/polly using our custom fink packaging scripts with the -DLLVM_REVERSE_ITERATION:BOOL=ON cmake option. There were no stage2/stage3 object file comparison failures or test suite regressions. I do have one question