similar to: [LLVMdev] Antler V3 Grammar for LLVM IR

Hello Surinder, The existing hand-written parser is callable from almost anywhere so the only reason you'd need to have a parser for it would be to extend it. Originally it was written using Flex and Bison but Chris Lattner rewrote it from scratch to catch more errors at the parsing stage. The only feature I've found to be missing from the existing LLVM-AS utility was an include

Hi Sam, Thanks for your reply. I am implementing my research (http://www.it.usyd.edu.au/~suri/Detecting%20Buffer%20Over.pdf), a translation of LLVM to a simple non-deterministic language to detect buffer overflows. It involves (1) printing a control flow graph of basic blocks of a function (easily done) (2) translating each llvm statement to a corresponding data flow language (needs ASTs to

Has anyone written a grammar for LLVM for ANTLR. I mean an ANTLR grammar that parses LLVM instructions. Is an LLVM grammar available for any other parsing tool? Surinder

On 20 Mar 2007, at 15:45, Jeff Cohen wrote: > Duncan Sands wrote: >>> If that fails, I will build a front-end using ANTLR [http:// >>> antlr.org] a parser generator with which I am familiar and for >>> which a FORTRAN grammar is already available (targeting an >>> obsolete version of ANTLR, but it should not be too difficult to >>> update).

For a LL(1) parser, it might be a little bit difficult to parse complex grammar like C++, but it might work. ANTLR worked great when other codes were written in Java, but it was a little bit painful when using other languages like python. I worked on it two years ago. I guess they might have some improvement now. Haohui On 07/11/2009 02:40 PM, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > We are looking for an

When you create a parser via ANTLR you specify the output language of the resulting recursive descent parser, at the moment there exists no C++ output template to my knowledge, thus you would have to generate the parser as C code for which a template exists. The runtime support should be there, at least partially but it won't use things like exceptions, nor will it have a very modular design

Duncan Sands wrote: >> If that fails, I will build a >> front-end using ANTLR [http://antlr.org] a parser generator with which >> I am familiar and for which a FORTRAN grammar is already available >> (targeting an obsolete version of ANTLR, but it should not be too >> difficult to update). >> > > Bad plan. I doubt you can build a serious fortran

We are looking for an open source C++ parser other than g++ if possible. Clang would be great but its C++ support is still some way away and we need something that works or nearly works now. Does anyone have any experience with ANTLR for parsing C++ and for extending their C++ parser? Any other feedback on ANTLR in general would be welcome too. Thanks, --Vikram Associate Professor,

Hi Scott, I'm currently porting the Ada gcc front-end to LLVM. This is similar to what you want to do, so here are some comments from the trenches... > I plan on first attempting to implement the FORTRAN front-end by > co-opting the GCC FORTRAN parser. Good plan. However the Fortran front-end that comes with gcc 4.0 is known to be weak (llvm-gcc is based on gcc 4.0). That's

Whoops, sending it to to llvm list as well, freaking takes another ~70 seconds to do a reply to all instead of a reply to, headers still not following standards of every other list I have ever been on... On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Stefan Oestreicher <stefan.oestreicher at deluxe-design.at> wrote: > Hi, >> I have no >> idea why it works now, there is no difference. >

Hello Tim, Thank you for getting back to me. The language grammar as defined by the LLVM Language Reference Manual [1] does not include the details of the LLVM IR parser reference implementation. The following extract from "lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp" illustrates that unnamed globals are allowed [2]. > /// ParseUnnamedGlobal: > /// OptionalVisibility (ALIAS | IFUNC) ...

I've done extensive research on the subject and if you want to parse ALL of C++, there are only two options, g++ or the Edison Design Group C++ front-end. Both of these have projects designed to make this easier LLVM (as you know) and Rose (http://www.rosecompiler.org/), which works with the EDG compiler. AspectC++, OpenC++, Antler, TLX, all work with only a portion of the grammer. On Sat,

Gordon reminded me that most people seem to generate code using code, whereas it has become natural for me to use templates to generate code. Let me include an example from an article I'm working on (Java centric). The same argument goes for LLVM IR templates versus using the C++ interface. Generating LLVM IR for me is super simple. Here are a few of my templates for generating IR

Vijay Daultani wrote: > Respected Sir/Madam, > > As I was developing some part of compiler for a project. I require grammar > (BNF or EBNF) for converting the C code in the IR as it is not been > mentioned any where over your official website. I don't know what you mean by "converting the C code in the IR". Regardless, LLVM does not have BNF or EBNF forms (or any

I am curious how do you guys do it anyways? On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > Vijay Daultani wrote: > >> Respected Sir/Madam, >> >> As I was developing some part of compiler for a project. I require grammar >> (BNF or EBNF) for converting the C code in the IR as it is not been >> mentioned any where over your

Hello everyone, While developing a parser for LLVM IR, I seem to have stumbled upon a potential ambiguity in the LLVM IR assembly language grammar. Most likely there is something which I may have overlooked, so wanted to reach out to a more experienced crowed for some feedback. How would the following set of tokens be interpreted [1]? declare void @foo() unnamed_addr global i32 42 As far as

Hi Terence, The reason I remarked, actually, is that for LLVM in particular the C+ + API offers more safety, and emitting .ll generally requires at least partially reimplementing the IR object model. I think this is a topic in the FAQ. But both are perfectly valid approaches! - Gordon On Apr 23, 2008, at 14:04, Terence Parr <parrt at cs.usfca.edu> wrote: > Gordon reminded me that

There's been a lot of discussion on this list about creating a formal grammar for markdown. I had a go at writing a [parsing expression grammar] for markdown. I used Haskell and John Meacham's Frisby PEG parsing library, but it should not be too hard to port the grammar to PEG libraries in other languages. [parsing expression grammar]:

On 2016-05-26 02:42, Tim Northover via llvm-dev wrote: > On 25 May 2016 at 16:10, Robin Eklind via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> declare void @foo() unnamed_addr >> global i32 42 > > Doesn't a global have to be named? The syntax in the IR reference > doesn't make it optional: > > @<GlobalVarName> = [Linkage]

On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Vijay Daultani <vijay.daultani at gmail.com>wrote: > Respected Sir/Madam, > > As I was developing some part of compiler for a project. I require grammar > (BNF or EBNF) for converting the C code in the IR as it is not been > mentioned any where over your official website. > > Awaiting for your help. > > Hi Vijay, If you are asking