similar to: [LLVMdev] Problems with class inheritance in LLVM

On Apr 5, 2011, at 10:53 AM, Tarun Pondicherry wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to build llvm on a Solaris/Sparc machine. I get many undefined symbols during the link phase of opt. The link command being run is below. > > It is identical to the link command that gets run and works on an x86 host. > > Thanks, > Tarun > > g++

Bill, thanks for your comments. I'll respond to them individually. I've attached a new revision of the patch that addresses them. Patch built and tested against SVN 79487, with the additional attached fix that fixes an Intel table bug. Sean On 2009/08/18, at 0:57, Bill Wendling wrote: > 0. Watch out for tabs! Fixed. Thanks. > 1. Includes like this "#include

Hi all, BitstreamReader is the only in-tree client of the DataStreamer and MemoryObject interfaces. In practice when using user-facing LLVM tools, the bitcode will normally either be in memory or in a file, so the best way to access it is through memory, either directly or memory mapped. As part of some refactorings I am making to BitstreamReader, I would like to simplify it by changing it to

And on a separate thread [0] Derek indicated he'd be fine with removing it. I'll leave this thread open until end of Monday to receive any other opinions, then proceed to remove it. Peter [0] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20161024/400754.html On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > >

On Aug 19, 2009, at 4:39 PM, Sean Callanan wrote: > thanks for your comments. I'll respond to them individually. I've > attached a new revision of the patch that addresses them. Patch > built and tested against SVN 79487, with the additional attached fix > that fixes an Intel table bug. Thanks Sean, comments below. Are you sure you attached the updated patch? I

Awesome! Thanks, Rafael On 28 October 2016 at 13:14, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > And on a separate thread [0] Derek indicated he'd be fine with removing it. > I'll leave this thread open until end of Monday to receive any other > opinions, then proceed to remove it. > > Peter > > [0] >

On Dec 17, 2013, at 9:32 , Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com> wrote: > > On Dec 17, 2013, at 9:24 , Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com> wrote: > >> Hi, Takumi. Your CMake changes seem to be working just fine with the standalone Xcode build. However, the build products are still being put in bin/Debug instead of Debug/bin. Was that supposed to change yet? Maybe

Good summer, all! This patch enables ENABLE_SHARED=1 to build DLL based LLVM toolchain. I have checked this on Cygwin-1.5, Cygwin-1.7, mingw(msysgit) and mingw-cross-fedora12. I can separate this patch into some parts; cleanups, adding definitions and adding rules. Any feedbacks are welcome. Have fun! ...Takumi * Pros - reduction of linking time of toolchain. - capability of -load

On Dec 17, 2013, at 9:24 , Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com> wrote: > Hi, Takumi. Your CMake changes seem to be working just fine with the standalone Xcode build. However, the build products are still being put in bin/Debug instead of Debug/bin. Was that supposed to change yet? Maybe Xcode needs different settings? > > (I think I looked into this once and it was non-trivial

On Dec 18, 2013, at 9:44 , Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com> wrote: > > On Dec 17, 2013, at 9:32 , Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Dec 17, 2013, at 9:24 , Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, Takumi. Your CMake changes seem to be working just fine with the standalone Xcode build. However,

On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 at 20:33, John McCall via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Seems like a reasonable project! Maybe we can get a SoC student to make a > standalone C++ demangler library with a tree API (an unstable one should be > fine), and debuggers can just use that instead of relying on the OS's > cxa_demangle. (I'm really not sure why

Hi Tom, hi Michael, Thank you for your help. I understand the linking problem. What I do not understand is how to debug the difference between two versions of compilers. This what I do (briefly): clang++-4 foobar.cpp -lLLVM -l/opt/llvm-3.9/lib clang++-5 foobar.cpp -lLLVM -l/opt/llvm-3.9/lib The first command produces a working executable, while the other one does not. I'm trying to

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Songmao <smtian at ingenic.cn> wrote: > Michael, >    I have rework the patch according to your suggestion.  And I have read > binutil/objdump source code and found that it has a logic that if there's no > symtab, it will use dynsym, which is missing in llvm-objdump. > > Songmao > @@ -747,12 +747,28 @@ error_code

I'm running R2.0.1 under Solaris 2.9 on a SunBlade 100. When I installed it, I set things up to use the Sun compilers cc, CC, f95 with the options recommended in the installation and administration guide. Until today, no worries. With all this discussion about R GUIs I thought I'd give R Commander a go. The web page said to install a bunch of packages first, so I did >

On 31 May 2018 at 08:41, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I understand the linking problem. What I do not understand is how to debug the difference between two versions of compilers. > This what I do (briefly): > > clang++-4 foobar.cpp -lLLVM -l/opt/llvm-3.9/lib > > clang++-5 foobar.cpp -lLLVM -l/opt/llvm-3.9/lib If you add -v then Clang will

Anton, Thanks for your comment. 2nd patch attached. - s/SharedDir/SharedLibDir/g - move prefix=cyg sunk into if(cygwin or mingw) arigato gozaimasu...Takumi * Additional issues - You may build LLVMHello.dll but I don't modify lib/Transforms/Makefile. Because making LLVMHello.dll requires the library LLVM.dll, but it oughta be on the way to making libs at building

I was away doing other things for a while, but I have an API patch separated out, which (in addition to being much smaller than past megapatches) corrects two issues Chris identified in his most recent set of patches: - First, it makes the API a good deal simpler. Now, you can instantiate a single MCDisassembler and, each time you want an instruction disassembled, you can simply pass

AS a proof of concept experiment, I want to try and integrate Asterisk with my Lucent Definity G3 switch. I don?t have an available T1 port on the G3 but I can round up 4 analog ports off the G3. What I thought I could do is create a ?Hunt group? on the G3. Let?s say I configure 5610 ? 5613 as a hunt group. I know I would need a 4 port FXO card to install in the Asterisk server. Two configuration

Hi, I wonder how to pass several functions and their arguments as arguments to a function. For example, the main function is f = function(X ) { process1(X) ... process2(X) } I have a few functions that operate on X, e.g. g1(X, par1), g2(X, par2), g3(X, par3). par1, par2 and par3 are parameters and of different types. I would like to pass g1, g2, g3 and their arguments to f and g1,

Hi Sean, > the attached diff implements a table-driven disassembler for the X86 > architecture (16-, 32-, and 64-bit incarnations), integrated into > the MC framework. The disassembler is table-driven, using a custom > TableGen backend to generate hierarchical tables optimized for fast > decode. The disassembler consumes MemoryObjects and produces arrays > of