similar to: [LLVMdev] Any experiemnts/evaluations on LLVM and graph rewriting (term-rewriting) systems?

Valery Khamenya wrote: > are there any attempts to use LLVM in graph-rewriting (term-rewriting) > language implementations? Pure is a dynamically typed FPL based on term rewriting: http://pure-lang.googlecode.com/ It uses the LLVM JIT to compile and execute code on the fly in an interpreter-like environment, and can also batch-compile code to native executables. This includes the

Hi Valery On 13 September 2010 19:07, Valery Khamenya <khamenya at gmail.com> wrote: > are there any attempts to use LLVM in graph-rewriting (term-rewriting) > language implementations? I've added a new LLVM backend to the ghc Haskell compiler. > How good is LLVM for this? Works very well. I'm operating from the low levels of the ghc compiler though where I don't

Hi David, Your paper is linked on an LLVM site, but I can't give you the url as we are currently down for maintenance. If I remember correctly it was under "recent papers" off of the home site. Garrison On Feb 21, 2010, at 18:55, David Terei wrote: > Just to correct, the GCC back-end isn't being depreciated in favour of > the LLVM back-end (as much as I would to claim

I found this interesting: http://donsbot.wordpress.com/2010/02/21/smoking-fast-haskell-code-using-ghcs-new-llvm-codegen/

On 22 February 2010 19:43, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > I found this interesting: > http://donsbot.wordpress.com/2010/02/21/smoking-fast-haskell-code-using-ghcs-new-llvm-codegen/ David Terei sent it a few days ago too, as part of another thread. (which prevented me of sharing too) ;) It's really interesting how the optimizations scrambled the code to a point of

Gulhsdholgv signature yfhjvhgvhgjhgfj Envoyé depuis SFR Mail - iPhone ____________________ De : "Valery Khamenya" Date : 13 sept. 2010 11:45:57 À : "LLVM Developers Mailing List" Sujet : [LLVMdev] Any experiemnts/evaluations on LLVM and graph rewriting (term-rewriting) systems? Hi, are there any attempts to use LLVM in graph-rewriting (term-rewriting) language

On Feb 21, 2010, at 4:53 PM, Garrison Venn wrote: > Hi David, > > Your paper is linked on an LLVM site, but I can't give you the url as we are > currently down for maintenance. If I remember correctly it was under "recent papers" > off of the home site. It's here: http://llvm.org/pubs/2009-10-TereiThesis.html -Chris > > Garrison > > On Feb 21,

On Feb 19, 2010, at 13:09, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Feb 19, 2010, at 11:33 AM, james woodyatt wrote: >> >> Let us all now give a warm welcome to our new Haskell comrades! > > Very nice, care to add a GHC entry to the LLVM Users page? I'll prepare a patch that could be applied when the merge is formally released by the GHC developers. — j h woodyatt <jhw at

Just to correct, the GCC back-end isn't being depreciated in favour of the LLVM back-end (as much as I would to claim it was). The GCC back-end has been on the list of things GHC developers wanted to remove for a while now and the larger reason its being done now is that SSE support has recently been added to the native code generator, fixing one of the last advantages the C back-end had.

Building PowerPC.td register information header with tblgen Included from PowerPC.td:22: Parsing PowerPCInstrInfo.td:53: Variable not defined: 'GPRC'! make[3]: *** [PowerPCGenRegisterInfo.h.inc] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/pool/tmp/ssrc/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC' maybe I just have to "make clean" and/or ./configure BTW, would it be nice to put Depend, Release and

Hi LLVMers, the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible optimizations are really invoked. Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3 on my Athlon XP 1500. Nice. P.S. guys, no fears, I don't plan to flood the cvs repository with my "brilliant" examples ;) --- Valery A.Khamenya -------------- next part -------------- An

Hi all, web-browser access to cvs is of course nice, but is it possible to provide anonymous read-only access to llvm cvs? (it would be nice to have an ability just download last sources) P.S. BTW, this and previous my post were actually motivated by desire to find some simple example on JIT usage :) --- Valery A.Khamenya

Hello LLVM fathers, 1. "languages, semantic trees" what do you think ideally, do languages implementations based on LLVM need internal semantic tree or they should rather try to use LLVM directly in/after syntax parsing? For languages like C++ the expected answer is "of course we need an internal semantic tree between parsing and LLVM!" But I am still

Hi all, I think there is still too few docs/samples for those, who'd like to write JIT-based interpreters. Today, the real examples to learn from are rather: - lli.cpp - ModuleMaker.cpp - Stacker which is still unfortunatelly not that much about JITing :( Well, what I am going to sell: What about very small JIT-based example similar to ModuleMaker? I mean example, where, say, two

Hi, where could one find any LLVM development roadmap for this and perhaps next year? Especially would be interesting to know about * planned features for PS3 Cell processor -- as well as for Wii, Xbox360 CPUs * multithreading in general * possibly coming changes in major versioning and related issues * other interesting featuring comments on current status to above listed items are also

Hi all maybe it is of interest for someone: I successfully compiled llvm and gcc front-end sources at Gentoo Linux (even on exotic x86-compatible CPU). Things seem to be running OK. This is a good prerequisite for making llvm ebuild script and promote llvm to hackers of fast-growing progressive Gentoo world. -- Valery A.Khamenya

Hi David, > Any word on this making 3.0? 3.0 already branched, and since this is not a regression, this will most probably go into 3.1. Maybe Bill (CC'ed) being the release manager has other opinion on this. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

Hi All, The GHC developers would like to add support to llvm to enable the order that code and data are laid out in, in the resulting assembly code produced by llvm to be defined by the user. The reason we would like to have this feature is explained in the blog post on GHC's use of llvm here: http://blog.llvm.org/2010/05/glasgow-haskell-compiler-and-llvm.html, specifically under the title,

Hi all, compilation of package llvm-1.0.tar.gz under redhat 9 is failed with following output: ------- make[3]: *** No rule to make target `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/runtime/GCCLibraries/crtend/BytecodeObj/C++-Exception.bc', needed by `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/lib/BytecodeLibs/libcrtend.bc'. Stop. make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/vak/llvm/llvm/runtime/GCCLibraries/crtend' ...skipped -------

Hi all see $subj http://www.google.com/trends?q=llvm congrats! P.S. sorry if known. best regards -- Valery A.Khamenya -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20080318/2bfc6887/attachment.html>