similar to: [LLVMdev] Build problems with llvm-tblgen

Hi, I am wondering about the meaning of the cmake flags LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXX and LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXXABI. Are they used to indicate that if the C/C++ compiler for building LLVM is clang, and if this clang has support for libc++ with libc++Abi, that both lib++ and libc++abi should be used (instead of linking to the default, which at least on Linux is libstdc++)? If not, what is the canonical way of

Hi Michael, I am wondering about the meaning of the cmake flags LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXX and > LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXXABI. Are they used to indicate that if the C/C++ compiler > for building LLVM is clang, and if this clang has support for libc++ with > libc++Abi, that both lib++ and libc++abi should be used (instead of linking > to the default, which at least on Linux is libstdc++)? Yes that

Wouldn’t it it be possible to add a flag like the one used in the OpenMP subproject? There they default to linking to the non-functional libgomp (as far as I understand it), and if people want to use the actual libomp runtime, they have to specify -fopenmp=libomp when compiling/linking a program. At the same time, it is possible to use the libomp runtime library by default by specifying

On 28 July 2015 at 12:10, Schlottke-Lakemper, Michael <m.schlottke-lakemper at aia.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: > I am wondering about the meaning of the cmake flags LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXX and LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXXABI. Are they used to indicate that if the C/C++ compiler for building LLVM is clang, and if this clang has support for libc++ with libc++Abi, that both lib++ and libc++abi should be used

On 28 July 2015 at 14:44, Martell Malone <martellmalone at gmail.com> wrote: > Adding a little to the topic what criteria would we need to make a target > use compiler-rt and libc++ as the default in the clang driver. > I have successfully built a standalone clang toolchain with mingw-w64 > without using gcc or binutils. There was another discussion with David Chisnall, where he

Hi Renato I had the impression that Michael actually wanted the latter, like GCC > has autoconf options to change the default behaviour of the compiler > at build time. > > I may be wrong, though. yes I thought that was what he wanted because he said Are they used to indicate that if the C/C++ compiler for building LLVM is > clang > That combined with the standard cmake

> On Aug 3, 2015, at 10:24 AM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: > > Hey Tom, > > I’m not a regular user of llvm-config, but this sounds completely right to me, and it would be a significant improvement over what we have now. > > The only question I want to raise is, what about NDEBUG? There are headers that conditionalize on NDEBUG, which could lead to ABI

Hi folks, In our scientific simulation tool, we set up our build system to link against LLVMSupport to print stack traces for debugging purposes, also from other compilers. This works very well on most hosts, but we fail to make it work with gcc on a Cray XC 40 cluster. They have a very restrictive toolchain setup (everything is controlled by the “module” command; you never get to see any real

LLVM Weekly - #1, Jan 6th 2014 ============================== Welcome to the inaugural issue of LLVM Weekly, a weekly newsletter (published every Monday) covering developments in LLVM, Clang, and related projects. I've been a long time lurker on the LLVM and Clang mailing lists and have been using LLVM extensively in my PhD research for the past 4 years. I thought it might be worthwhile to

We would like to compile a minimal R library that could be linked into an application that will be run on a BlueGene/L system with 8,192 processors. This is a system that requires no shared libraries, no graphical interface, must be single threaded, and will be cross- compiled. I would statically link the code for the packages we require. From looking through the code, it seems like it

Also please note that there is a description of each option in the CMakeLists.txt :) llvm/trunk/CMakeLists.txt option(LLVM_ENABLE_MODULES "Compile with C++ modules enabled." OFF) option(LLVM_ENABLE_CXX1Y "Compile with C++1y enabled." OFF) option(LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXX "Use libc++ if available." OFF) option(LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXXABI "Use libc++abi when using

2011/4/8 ether zhhb <etherzhhb at gmail.com>: > Hi, > > 2011/4/8 Vlad Krylov <krvladislav at gmail.com>: >> Hi. >> >> I see that to detect scops firstly we search for regions in CFG ( by >> RegionInfo ) and then select regions that answer some requirements ( >> in ScopDetection ). Because only affine expressions in conditions and >> bounds

Hi Does anyone have experience of running CentOS on HP hardware, both rack mount kit and blades? How are things like hardware monitoring etc? We may be moving from Dell to HP and i get on really well with OMSA and Nagios etc so ideally would like to monitor using similar tools rather than some central 'enterprise' dashboard etc. Any real world experience? thanks

On 04/08/2011 08:35 PM, Vlad Krylov wrote: > 2011/4/8 ether zhhb<etherzhhb at gmail.com>: >> Hi, >> >> 2011/4/8 Vlad Krylov<krvladislav at gmail.com>: >>> Hi. >>> >>> I see that to detect scops firstly we search for regions in CFG ( by >>> RegionInfo ) and then select regions that answer some requirements ( >>> in

Hello Since 2.4.20, we have problems with ext3. Machine is 2xPentium III (1GHz), 2GB RAM, 1GB swap. RH 8.0 (glibc-2.3.1-21), gcc (GCC) 3.2 20020903 We have a lot of users: oceanic:~# wc -l /etc/passwd 6694 /etc/passwd connected via SAMBA (2.2.7) from 200-300 Windows-XX workstations Partition with ext3 looks like this: oceanic:~# mount |grep ext3 /dev/sdb5 on /home1 type ext3

Hi everyone, Colleagues of mine at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), having seen the advantages of working closely with LLVM, have decided to toss their hat into the ring and would like to hire an LLVM-focused compiler engineer. I collaborate with LLNL regularly, and I'm excited that they're taking this step. I expect that a qualified applicant will find this position both

On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 02:43:03PM +0200, Michael Kruse via llvm-dev wrote: > 2016-10-03 13:55 GMT+02:00 Martin J. O'Riordan via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>: > > I am trying to implement some new alignment based optimisations in our > > target backend, and I am wondering if there a way a target can specify that > > ‘malloc’, ‘realloc’ and ‘calloc’

David provided one good answer. I'll give another. The current design pushes complexity into the language frontend for - as far as I know - no good reason. I can say from recent experience that the corner cases around atomics are both surprising and result in odd looking hacks in the frontend. To say this differently, why should marking loads and stores atomic required me to rewrite

Hi, 2011/4/8 Vlad Krylov <krvladislav at gmail.com>: > Hi. > > I see that to detect scops firstly we search for regions in CFG ( by > RegionInfo ) and then select regions that answer some requirements ( > in ScopDetection ). Because only affine expressions in conditions and > bounds are permissible, we trying to get scalar expressions into > affine form by

Oops! I mistook UDT for CDT! I've missed deadline, so... 2011/4/9 Tobias Grosser <grosser at fim.uni-passau.de>: > On 04/08/2011 08:35 PM, Vlad Krylov wrote: >> >> 2011/4/8 ether zhhb<etherzhhb at gmail.com>: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> 2011/4/8 Vlad Krylov<krvladislav at gmail.com>: >>>> >>>> Hi.