similar to: [LLVMdev] Current state of the lld project

2013/10/31 Daniel Albuschat <d.albuschat at gmail.com>: > on the lld main page at http://lld.llvm.org, it says: > > "lld is in its early stages of development. > It can currently self host on Linux x86-64 with -static." > > Is this information up-to-date? I made a quick test on a Windows 8 64bit system: test.c: int main () { return 42; } > clang -c test.c

2013/11/4 Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com>: > Awesome! As far as I know you are the first person outside Google to try out > LLD on Windows. :) Glad to hear that it worked. Hey Rui, glad that I can help out. I was going to use lld in the following scenario: I'm writing a programming language and started with unit-tests that build ASTs for small test cases. I then want to generate

I think I removed all uses of ErrorOr<void>. Can you try updating? On 15 November 2013 12:09, Daniel Albuschat <d.albuschat at gmail.com> wrote: > Hey there, > > lld fails to build on Visual Studio 2013 because of ErrorOr<void>. > For example, ErrorOr<void> is used in InputGraph.h as the return type > of InputGraph::reset. > Inside of ErrorOr, there is:

Hey there, lld fails to build on Visual Studio 2013 because of ErrorOr<void>. For example, ErrorOr<void> is used in InputGraph.h as the return type of InputGraph::reset. Inside of ErrorOr, there is: typedef typename remove_reference<T>::type &reference As T is void, and remove_reference <T>::type results in void, the typedef expands to: typedef void & reference,

I'm currently using MSVC 2012, but I saw that Alp Toker landed a patch to LLD to make it compile with MSVC 2013, so I believe it's doable. Update and try again. On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > I think I removed all uses of ErrorOr<void>. Can you try updating? > > On 15 November 2013 12:09, Daniel Albuschat

Hi all, According to lld/docs/Driver.rst, Flavor command line option determines the style of lld command-line interface when invoked. However, it looks like this option also determines the set of supported targets we are linking for. For example, lld -flavor gnu cannot link mach-o binaries, and could not link PE binaries either (well, not until rL312926). Is this really intended by the design

On 10/7/2014 4:10 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: > Shankar, > > Can you give provide a scenario where you want this? I’m not sure what you want here. a) LLVM could be built just for one target(LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD) b) With LTO this case might happen more often, where an user would have compiled LLVM just for one architecture and lld would support other architectures that LLVM would not

Martell recently added "ld64.lld" as a name for the Darwin driver. As to why there's no driver that provides a unified command line arguments, I can't speak for other people. But no one seems to have been interested in it enough to actually invent and implement a set of unified command line arguments. On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:20 PM, N <scandium at me.com> wrote: >

I build llvm/clang/lld from source on Windows using mingw-64/gcc-6.3. I use clang++ both to test clang targeting gcc and clang targeting VC++. When using clang targeting VC++ I use the appropriate target triple when compiling and am trying to use lld to link the object file(s) into an exe. To do that I use the clang option "-fuse-ld=lld" when linking. According to the llvm doc on

I mean, there is such a universal driver -- it's called "clang". On Oct 26, 2017 5:31 PM, "Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: Martell recently added "ld64.lld" as a name for the Darwin driver. As to why there's no driver that provides a unified command line arguments, I can't speak for other people. But no one seems to

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Alex Rosenberg <alexr at leftfield.org> wrote: > This it totally "armchair quarterbacking," but I am a little frustrated > that we've come to conflate flavors and targets. > > The original intent of flavors was to internally translate each flavor > into a neutral lld-native command line syntax. We now have baked in >

Hi, I think lld needs to have an infrastructure as part of the build process to build specific flavors and specific targets. For this I was thinking that the Registry expand to consider flavors and targets that are part of the build process. So each flavor/target would register and the Driver would walk through the list of handlers to check if there is a handler defined for that

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > On 10/9/2013 4:19 PM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: > >> On 10/9/2013 3:09 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: >> >>> On Oct 9, 2013, at 11:23 AM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> We have a whole bunch of readers(we would have

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > On 10/9/2013 11:19 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: > >> >> Isnt having a YAML file starting with the below better, so that you dont >> need to go through file extensions. >> >> magic : >> arch: >> >> I guess we will use a fixed file extension anyway (we probaly

On 11/1/17 10:29 AM, N via llvm-dev wrote: > Thank you for your answers. > > Indeed, Clang is universal, but only until one needs to pass some commands to the linker which are not > automatically passed by the driver. Then we are back to the same problem. Clang and GCC both support the `-Wl,` and `-Xlinker` flags... Jon > > In my opinion, it would be great if lld had a

On 10/9/2013 11:19 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: > > Isnt having a YAML file starting with the below better, so that you dont > need to go through file extensions. > > magic : > arch: > > I guess we will use a fixed file extension anyway (we probaly don't want to > use .txt for YAML object file for example), so what do you think is the > benefit of depending on special

C:\t>type a.c #include <stdio.h> int main() { puts("hello"); return 0; } C:\t>cl /c a.c Microsoft (R) C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 19.00.23026 for x64 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. a.c C:\t>lld Select the appropriate flavor OVERVIEW: LLVM Linker USAGE: lld [options] <inputs> OPTIONS: -core CORE linking -flavor

# is a line comment chracter in YAML so it's valid. That's why I wrote a simple magic "comment". On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > On 10/10/2013 5:00 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Shankar Easwaran >> <shankare at codeaurora.org>**wrote: >> >> On

Ah! I don't know what GUARDSYM does or whether there is any way to turn it off at the compiler end; a Google search doesn't seem to find anything; but it would be great if you could add support for msvc 2015. When I try using clang as the compiler, I get a different error message. In this case it seems to be just not finding the standard libraries? C:\t>clang -c a.c C:\t>lld

On 10/10/2013 5:00 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Shankar Easwaran > <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > >> On 10/9/2013 11:19 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: >> >>> Isnt having a YAML file starting with the below better, so that you dont >>> need to go through file extensions. >>> >>> magic : >>> arch: