similar to: [LLVMdev] error compiling llvm 2.9/3.2 from source on macosx (possibly stdlibc++ issue)

I'm stuck on 10.8.5 and got around it by: 1. Building the most recent stable branch of libc++. I got a couple of errors in the regression tests, but they looked like something obscure enough to net affect the compiler and so far, that is panning out. 2. I ran configure as follows: ../llvm/configure CXXFLAGS="-stdlib=libc++ -I/Programming/llvm/libcxx34/test/support

Hi, I'm currently working on one of my team's project to build LLVM full clang toolchain (Clang, libcxx, libcxxabi) on a CentOS machine. Previously we compiled our codebase with llvm-toolset-7/clang++, which by default takes stdlibc++ to compile and link. And now we'd like to switch to use LLVM clang with libc++. I have built libc++ and libc++abi from source (5.0.1 release) and set

On 04/12/2019 06:31 PM, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev wrote: > On 04/12/2019 04:28 PM, AiChi via llvm-dev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm currently working on one of my team's project to build LLVM full clang toolchain (Clang, libcxx, libcxxabi) on a CentOS machine. >> >> Previously we compiled our codebase with llvm-toolset-7/clang++, which by default takes stdlibc++

Hello ! If anybody want`s to implement the psexec unix port or samba equivalent, maybe taking a look at xCmd from Zoltan Csizmadia at http://www.codeguru.com/Cpp/I-N/network/remoteinvocation/article.php/c5433/ may help a LOT and is a very good example. (This one seems to work similar like psexec - but it is available with sourcecode!) I don`t know if the author is still reachable via this

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 07:56:41PM +0200, hw wrote: > Sure is: You get to manage your distribution yourself by picking the > versions of packages you figure might work together, which you are > supposed and required to do with Gentoo, especially when you run into > yet another dependency conflict. Only --- I guess --- you don?t get > the same level of control over the packages as

On 31 Jan 2015, at 03:02, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: > > Talked it over with Saleem on IRC, and I've come around to thinking libunwind is a better default for --rtlib=compiler-rt. Reason being that --rtlib=compiler-rt means libgcc probably isn't even available. On FreeBSD, we install compiler-rt as libgcc (or, at least, symlink it to libgcc). This means that

On 31 Jan 2015, at 03:02, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: > Talked it over with Saleem on IRC, and I've come around to thinking libunwind is a better default for --rtlib=compiler-rt. Reason being that --rtlib=compiler-rt means libgcc probably isn't even available. It's not just that, it's about making it self-contained. In a system with both gcc and llvm

Talked it over with Saleem on IRC, and I've come around to thinking libunwind is a better default for --rtlib=compiler-rt. Reason being that --rtlib=compiler-rt means libgcc probably isn't even available. On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Dan Albert <danalbert at google.com> wrote: >

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > Adding some people that know about libcxx and/or windows on arm. > Note that if you are trying to use Windows on ARM port, I've not tested C++ support with MS ABI, onlly the itanium ABI has been tested (there are known limitations for the C++ MS ABI on Windows ARM). Furthermore, we do not

On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 03:40:42PM +0200, hw wrote: > >No, this isn't it it all. Modules are sets of packages which the > >distribution creators have selected to work together; you don't compose > >modules as an end-user. > > Then maybe my understanding of packages and/or modules is wrong. > What is considered a module? What if I replace, for example, >

Hi, Simple description of the problem below. I have code coming into pruneEH as follows fn a { entry: call fn b ... for_cond: %i = phi [1, entry] [%x, for_body] cmp $i with someval cond-br for_body or for_exit for_body: ... $x = $i + 1 branch for_cond for_exit ... } PruneEH determines that the call to fn-b won't return. The code is modified thus. fn a { entry: call fn b unreachable insn

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:30 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 8:31 AM Alina Sbirlea <alina.sbirlea at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Dave, >> >> It may be possible to do this with the current API, but what I was >> looking for is a common API for existing block types. For example there is >> no

Hi Dave, It may be possible to do this with the current API, but what I was looking for is a common API for existing block types. For example there is no succ_begin for Machine BasicBlock. I'm looking to make the CFGSuccessors and CFGPredecessors classes in CFGDiff.h templated, and this needs a common API for all types instantiations. Does this clarify your question or did I misunderstand

Matthieu, On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy at grenoble-inp.fr> wrote: > At some point in the past, an anti-git-svn system had been set up on > llvm.org. Has this been disabled since? I don't manage to do much with > git-svn: Maybe sure. Anton said it is disabled to access upper directories with svn. Thus, we (accessing llvm.org remotely) cannot do

Hi, As part of an ongoing work to extend the GraphDiff (this models a CFG view), I came across the need to have a common interface for accessing successors/predecessors in various IR units, such that a type such as `typename NodeT::succ_iterator` could be used in templated code. In particular, the need arose for BasicBlocks, MachineBasicBlocks, VPBlockBase and clang::CFGBlock. The least invasive

As stated in an earlier email, I am working on getting break/continue to work correctly for my backend, but I ran into another issue with codegen and the CFG. It seems that code gen is not done based on the CFG, but rather on the block numbers, and the function call MachineFunction::RenumberBlocks doesn't renumber the blocks based on the CFG. So how can I modify the CFG so that when codegen

It would go something like like the code below. The goal would be to turn the basic blocks which the graph looks like "...->x->y->..." where the instructions of x and y could live in the same basic block without a jump or fall through in between. bool runOnMachineFunction(MachineFunction &mf) { BitVector seen( mf.size() ); for( unsigned i = 0, e = mf.size();

On Oct 13, 2008, at 5:14 PMPDT, Villmow, Micah wrote: > As stated in an earlier email, I am working on getting break/ > continue to work correctly for my backend, but I ran into another > issue with codegen and the CFG. It seems that code gen is not done > based on the CFG, but rather on the block numbers, and the function > call MachineFunction::RenumberBlocks doesn’t

Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> writes: >> What options were used with git-svn init?  It certainly can support >> multiple branch/tag directories: >> >> init >>  --tags=<tags_subdir> >>  --branches=<branches_subdir> >> >>  You can specify more than one --tags and/or --branches options, in >>  case your

NAKAMURA Takumi <geek4civic at gmail.com> writes: > Matthieu, > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Matthieu Moy > <Matthieu.Moy at grenoble-inp.fr> wrote: >> At some point in the past, an anti-git-svn system had been set up on >> llvm.org. Has this been disabled since? I don't manage to do much with >> git-svn: > > Maybe sure. Anton said it is