similar to: [LLVMdev] Final added to parser<bool>

//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// // FalseParser //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// class FalseParser : public parser<bool> { public: explicit FalseParser(Option &O) : parser<bool>(O) { } // parse - Return true on error. bool parse(cl::Option& O, StringRef ArgName, StringRef

One could argue that mclinker is doing something good or not by how it's using this class but I don't see the need for parser<bool> to be final. That is a subjective opinion that mclinker needs to be changed. I think that "final" was added to some of these command line classes to avoid some kind of clang warning. That seems wrong to me that the tools are dictating

On 03/19/2015 08:55 AM, David Blaikie wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:30 AM, Reed Kotler <Reed.Kotler at imgtec.com > <mailto:Reed.Kotler at imgtec.com>> wrote: > > One could argue that mclinker is doing something good or not by > how it's using this class > but I don't see the need for parser<bool> to be final. That is a >

Well, you are an mclinker contributor and Google uses mclinker and now it's broken as the result of your change. I still don't see any justification to making a change in a public interface that is used by other non LLVM projects to fix some issue with clang warnings. People should be able to derive from those classes. I can't understand your reasoning as to why these classes must

On 03/19/2015 09:24 AM, David Blaikie wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Reed Kotler <reed.kotler at imgtec.com > <mailto:reed.kotler at imgtec.com>> wrote: > > Well, you are an mclinker contributor > > > Me personally? Not that I know of. Sorry. I thought i had seen your name in an mclinker commit. > > and Google uses mclinker >

On 03/19/2015 09:38 AM, David Blaikie wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Reed Kotler <reed.kotler at imgtec.com > <mailto:reed.kotler at imgtec.com>> wrote: > > On 03/19/2015 09:24 AM, David Blaikie wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Reed Kotler >> <reed.kotler at imgtec.com <mailto:reed.kotler at

On 03/19/2015 09:57 AM, David Blaikie wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Reed Kotler <reed.kotler at imgtec.com > <mailto:reed.kotler at imgtec.com>> wrote: > > On 03/19/2015 09:38 AM, David Blaikie wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Reed Kotler >> <reed.kotler at imgtec.com <mailto:reed.kotler at

2011/11/1 Jush Lu (盧育龍) <Jush.Lu at mediatek.com>: > Hi all, > > We are developing a linker, MCLinker. > > MCLinker is a linker for LLVM. It leverages the LLVM machine code (MC) layer to link object files and bitcodes, and generate shared objects and executable files. > > > Motivation > ---------- > > The development of MCLinker was started out of the need

Hi all, We are developing a linker, MCLinker. MCLinker is a linker for LLVM. It leverages the LLVM machine code (MC) layer to link object files and bitcodes, and generate shared objects and executable files. Motivation ---------- The development of MCLinker was started out of the need for an LLVM integrated linker. LLVM lacks an integrated linker; hence, it relies on external linkers to

Dear LLVM user and developer, We get a chance to give a tutorial on LLVM and MCLinker. The tutorial will be co-located with CGO 2013 on Feb. 24 (Sunday morning) in Shenzhen, China. If you are also interesting in these topics, welcome to join the tutorial! Here is a website of the tutorial: http://code.google.com/p/mclinker/ We're also looking for additional presenters to share a

Hi all, The slides we used on "CGO MCLinker and LLVM Tutorial" are now available on the MCLinker website: http://code.google.com/p/mclinker/wiki/2013CGOTutorial Enjoy! - The CGO Tutorial on MCLinker and LLVM 2013 committee

Let's suppose that MCLinker folks are here already - I am a committer of this project :). Maybe I did not formulate my suggestion correctly. When I offer to "install" the yaml2obj and obj2yaml utilities I mean result of the "make install" command only. I do not suggest to include this utilities into any distributed binary packages. To be clear I attached the patch with

On 2 June 2016 at 23:22, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Because the patch includes way too much and doesn't explain what it is doing. So let me get this straight: someone publishes a patch, you don't like it, you do some private investigations and commit whatever you want without even notifying the original authors? I don't know how you work at

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 10:34:43PM +0800, Jush Lu (?c?|?s) wrote: > Hi all, > > We are developing a linker, MCLinker. > > MCLinker is a linker for LLVM. It leverages the LLVM machine code (MC) > layer to link object files and bitcodes, and generate shared objects > and executable files. Cool! A linker has been the largest gap for FreeBSD to move to a completely BSD

Now the yaml2obj and obj2yaml utilities used in LLVM and LLD projects tests only and not installed by the "make install" command. I think they might be also useful in third-party projects like MCLinker. I suggest to move these utilities into the "tools" category and install them together with other LLVM tools. Any objections or comments? -- Simon Atanasyan

I remember something called MCLinker back in times when LLD was starting. What happened to this project? Sorry if it's absolutely unrelated to the topic. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150530/92d5233c/attachment.html>

Hi, Brooks, Since this project is helped by many BSD guys in Taiwan, one of MCLinker's main objectives is make direct contribution to the BSD realm. Please feel free to give us suggestions to make sure we can achieve this goal. Any comments are appreciated. We realized open discussion on the mailing list is necessary, and we hope this thread can be a beginning to openly discuss the project

All, I'm upgrading some code that uses LLVM from 3.6 to 3.7. It looks like the llvm::cl::parser subclasses are now final? We had been doing: struct MaxThreadsParser : public llvm::cl::parser<unsigned> { bool parse(llvm::cl::Option &O, llvm::StringRef ArgName, llvm::StringRef Arg, unsigned &Val); }; But that's now causing: In file included from

Right now inline assembler just passes through to the assembler if there is no direct object emitter. If there is a direct object emitter, it gets processed in Asm parser and MC instructions are produced. I propose that the initial parsing happen very early and the inline assembly code be replaced with a sequence of MachineInstructions in the basic block where it occurs. Then code like

Hi all, As you might already know, there is a CGO tutorial talking about MCLinker and LLVM [1]. If you have interest in this topic, please don't hesitate to join us. ;) I, one of the co-oragnizers, are going to give a presentation talking about "LLVM Intermediate Representation". This presentation has three subjects: - LLVM's lowering flow - The intermediate