similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm msil couple questions

Hey there, Been googling but can't find. Thought to ask the wizards. The LLVM interpreter. I am creating a simple wrapper around it to run a script. The program after linking is about 25 megs stripped of debug symbols. This seems a bit large. Is it possible that this could somehow to be drastically reduced? Is it worth going and trying to rip things out? The code which instantiates

Dear Rudiger, Rüdiger Klaehn wrote: > Hello all. > > is it possible to use LLVM to optimize existing .NET assemblies? > It's in theory possible. LLVM+VMKit already does it for Java classes. > Basically doing the following: > > - read in MSIL and convert into LLVM internal representation > - perform global optimizations on LLVM internal representation > - write

Hello, > As for the state of the MSIL backend of LLVM, I don't think it's for > production use yet. Assemblies have lots of information in them and > maintaining them during the MSIL -> LLVM -> MSIL translations should be > the hard part. This should be pretty hard. MSIL is definitely much more high level than LLVM, that's why significant portion of information will

Hello all. is it possible to use LLVM to optimize existing .NET assemblies? Basically doing the following: - read in MSIL and convert into LLVM internal representation - perform global optimizations on LLVM internal representation - write out optimized MSIL using the existing LLVM backend I presume that the capability to convert MSIL into LLVM internal representation exists somewhere in VMKit.

Hi Artur, Artur Pietrek wrote: > Hello, > > I work in Kalray (Montbonnot, France) and I'm PhD student at Universite > Joseph Fourier in Grenoble. > We want to use LLVM framework for MSIL code generation, which is part of > my thesis. > Currently I'm still reading LLVM's documentation and I've started > completing the MSIL backend for running on Mono.

Hello, I work in Kalray (Montbonnot, France) and I'm PhD student at Universite Joseph Fourier in Grenoble. We want to use LLVM framework for MSIL code generation, which is part of my thesis. Currently I'm still reading LLVM's documentation and I've started completing the MSIL backend for running on Mono. Things that need to be fixed include pointers initialization, call to

Hello, Jeff. > I'm confused. A MSIL front end I can understand, but a back end? How > will it be used? The GCC-based front ends that come with LLVM generate > bytecodes that have dependencies on the GCC runtime, which is not going > to be present in a .NET environment. Well. It's LLVM-to-MSIL translator. So, if the source use some unsupported code... The same situation

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Jeff Cohen wrote: >> I'm confused. A MSIL front end I can understand, but a back end? How >> will it be used? The GCC-based front ends that come with LLVM generate >> bytecodes that have dependencies on the GCC runtime, which is not going >> to be present in a .NET environment. > > Who said the input has to come

Both backends are important but I find it more important the MSIL backend, for now. It's a shame that nobody is picking up the MSIL backend; it would be useful another backend that is machine-independent and that has support for several tools. -----Mensagem original----- De: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu em nome de Bruno Cardoso Lopes Enviada: qua 05-11-2008 19:47 Para: LLVM Developers

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Jeff Cohen wrote: > The problem is worse than I thought. > > MSIL, and .NET in general, defines a specific object model. This object > model is explicitly part of MSIL semantics. LLVM is at a lower level; > it does not have an object model. To do a virtual call, LLVM > instructions must be generated to load a function pointer from a vtable Unlike Java,

Hello, Jeff. > and dereference it. But MSIL is at a higher level, where one simply > uses the callvirt instruction to do a virtual call and no vtable is > supplied or even present. You're right. Consider we will have some FE for MSIL, which will just generate LLVM's "call" instruction with some predefined CC, which will mean "this is virtual call". Backend

On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info > wrote: > Hello, > > > As for the state of the MSIL backend of LLVM, I don't think it's for > > production use yet. Assemblies have lots of information in them and > > maintaining them during the MSIL -> LLVM -> MSIL translations should be > > the hard part. > This

Hello, Everyone. We've just commited new backend for LLVM: MSIL. The author of backend is Roman Samoilov from Codedgers Inc. (roman at codedgers.com). Backend itself is very similar to C backend (and actually was based on it). Note, it's pure LLVM-to-MSIL translator, so no additional checks etc. are performed. Backend is usable in general, but still lacks some important features: 1.

Hello everyone, I'm a little new to LLVM. I know that the backends are still in experimental stage. MSIL and MIPS would be very useful for a project that I'm working on. Do you have any plans to have it completed in the next few months? I could generate the MSIL assembly but when compiled it, which compiles sucessfully, it generates invalid opcode errors.

Hi, I am trying to use llvm to translate ftp.c(a file of wget-1.11.2.tar.bz2 ) to msil. But it shows errors like: [dayin at localhost src]$ llvm-gcc -emit-llvm ftp.c -c -o ftp.bc [dayin at localhost src]$ llc ftp.bc -march=msil -o ftp.s Intrinsic ID = 32 llc: /home/dayin/llvm/llvm-2.2/lib/Target/MSIL/MSILWriter.cpp:802: void <unnamed>::MSILWriter::printIntrinsicCall(const

In the interests of maintaining a complete thread, forwarding, (somehow got set to llvm-dev instead of llvmdev) ---- this is awesome!!! very nice.. I've been reading the code. I have a couple questions, which I should probably figure out myself, but might as well ask. With regards to new/delete. I assume these are being translated into calls to lib-functions? Is pointer arithmetic and

Hi Eduardo, > I'm a little new to LLVM. > I know that the backends are still in experimental stage. MSIL and MIPS > would be very useful for a project that I'm working on. Do you have any > plans to have it completed in the next few months? I could generate the > MSIL assembly but when compiled it, which compiles sucessfully, it > generates invalid opcode errors. As

Hi everyone! I am working on a .NET based project (actually written in C#). During the coding, we have noticed many inefficiencies of C# compiler to optimize code. Compiler performs only a few optimisations. A vital optimisation, inlining, is missed. The JIT-er has rules not to inline methods containing structs as parameters (this is really stupid!) and inlining methods longer than 20 bytes

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Jeff Cohen wrote: > I'm confused. A MSIL front end I can understand, but a back end? How > will it be used? The GCC-based front ends that come with LLVM generate > bytecodes that have dependencies on the GCC runtime, which is not going > to be present in a .NET environment. Who said the input has to come through the GCC front-ends? Perhaps this is for

Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Hello, Everyone. > > We've just commited new backend for LLVM: MSIL. The author of backend is > Roman Samoilov from Codedgers Inc. (roman at codedgers.com). Backend itself > is very similar to C backend (and actually was based on it). Note, it's > pure LLVM-to-MSIL translator, so no additional checks etc. are > performed. > I'm