Displaying 20 results from an estimated 9000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Another bad binutils?"
2010 May 05
0
[LLVMdev] Another bad binutils?
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?
>
2010 May 06
0
[LLVMdev] Another bad binutils?
I build llvm+clang almost every day with Ubuntu 10.04. Everything goes fine.
I guess it's your VirtualBox has too little memory.
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> wrote:
> After waiting through about 2 hours of hard drive spinning for Clang to
> link under my Xubuntu Lucid Lynx Linux setup on VirtualBox, ld finally just
> gave up trying
2010 May 05
5
[LLVMdev] Another bad binutils?
After waiting through about 2 hours of hard drive spinning for Clang to link under my Xubuntu Lucid Lynx Linux setup on VirtualBox, ld finally just gave up trying to link it. I was using CMake's build scripts on version 2.7 release of LLVM and Clang. The version of ld is (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.20.1-system.20100303. Can anyone confirm this problem? If needed I'll cross-post this to
2011 Jan 14
2
[LLVMdev] Circular Deps from CMake build using makefile
----- 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
2011 Jan 14
2
[LLVMdev] Circular Deps from CMake build using makefile
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
2011 Jan 14
2
[LLVMdev] Circular Deps from CMake build using makefile
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
2012 Jan 18
0
[LLVMdev] Fw: Should the Constant* pointer be declared with "const" or not?
Try to keep things on the mailing list, if possible. That usually means hitting "reply to all". (I forgot earlier, myself. Sorry.)
----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: Stepan Dyatkovskiy <STPWORLD at narod.ru>
> To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com>
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 1:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Should the Constant*
2011 Jan 06
1
[LLVMdev] Build problems and workarounds with CMake and XCode
----- 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:
>
>
2010 Jul 09
1
[LLVMdev] ValueSymbolTable's mutators are private?
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
2009 Nov 19
1
[LLVMdev] fastcc and ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction()
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> ----- 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:
2009 Dec 04
2
[LLVMdev] linking a parser bitcode
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
2011 Jan 15
0
[LLVMdev] Circular Deps from CMake build using makefile
Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> writes:
> I have attached the logfiles here.
I think you didn't set CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE while configuring the cmake
build. On your build directory, please do:
make clean
cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug path/to/your/llvm/source/root
make
If that doesn't work, show the exact command lines you used for invoking
cmake and the
2011 Jan 14
0
[LLVMdev] Circular Deps from CMake build using makefile
Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> writes:
> 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?
I'm clueless about what's happening there. The cyclic
2011 Jan 14
0
[LLVMdev] Circular Deps from CMake build using makefile
Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> writes:
> 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
2011 Jun 03
0
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> writes:
> Here's some of what it would take to make portable bitcodes in C or LLVM Assembly:
A look at the work done on ANDF in the 90's may be helpful. I've only
skimmed it but there's been some deep thinking about stuff like this.
-Dave
2011 Jul 18
1
[LLVMdev] Fw: RTTI gone in 3.0?
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
>
2010 Mar 23
1
[LLVMdev] is there any eclipse plug-in for td/ll files editing?
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
2011 Jan 05
2
[LLVMdev] Fw: include/Config/config.h discrepancies between CMake and autofoo builds
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
>
>
>
>
2010 Nov 10
1
[LLVMdev] Fw: llvm-gcc not compatible with gcc on a small case?
Whoops, forgot to CC: the list.
>
>----- Forwarded Message ----
>From: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com>
>To: Sheng Zhou <zhousheng00 at gmail.com>
>Sent: Tue, November 9, 2010 9:26:51 PM
>Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc not compatible with gcc on a small case?
>
>
>Hi Sheng Zhou,
>
>
>It shouldn't compile. You have the method declared
2011 Jun 04
0
[LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
----- Original Message -----
> From: Nate Fries <nfries88 at yahoo.com>
> To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com>; LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
> Cc:
> Sent: Friday, June 3, 2011 6:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Thinking about "whacky" backends
>
> Most JVMs perform terribly. Even Sun's has had notable performance