similar to: [LLVMdev] Tool to convert scala to llvm-IR

Hello all, I was looking into a tool / framework that will help me convert scala byte codes to llvm-IR. I have a few questions regarding the same : 1) Does such a tool exist ? If so, is it complete? 2) If so, is it complete? 3) If not, how would one proceed to create this tool ? Any pointers / links will be very helpful. Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

Hi, I have written my own implementation of markdown in Scala. I only later realized there is already one ( <http://tristanhunt.com/projects/knockoff/> ), but I put quite some work into mine and I think it is never bad to have alternatives, so I wanted to release it anyway. I want to use the same BSD License as the original markdown, but before I put it out into the wild I wanted to ask

Hi ruby community, It has been months after much experimenting RubyOnRail but it wasn''t chosen for my Enterprise project. Recently, I heard some of my friends argue that RubyOnRail is Enterprise-class framework which perform much better than PHP. IMHO, I think Play! 2.0 (Scala) can offer more than just a framework and high-performance. What are your thought on these comparison? -- You

Trying to access R from Netlogo5 (using the NetLogo R-Extension), running the configuration validation tests in NetLogo5/extensions/r/Systemcheck.nlogo, I get several loadlibrary() errors ... in rJava Check2, > library(rJava); .path.package('rJava') Error : .onLoad failed in loadNamespace() for 'rJava', details: call: inDL(x, as.logical(local), as.logical(now), ...)

Hi, I have a MapReduce Java code, which I am calling from R using rJava. I have prepared the R package and tested that successfully. But when I deployed the package in a cluster and executed it, I am getting ClassNotFoundException. If I run the same job directly without integrating with R, it runs perfectly. Here is my R code: library(rJava) muMstSpark <- function(mesosMaster = NULL, input =

I think even if we did use it, MoveImmediate is intended for instructions that move an immediate into a register rather than into memory. It's supposed to indicate instructions that can be folded with the user of the register by changing the user to an immediate instruction. And it wouldn't be set on an instruction like "addl $0, %eax" or "addl $0, (%ecx)" either since

I am trying to categorize the machine instructions based on associated static (i.e., as encoded in .td file) machine description and the corresponding APIs. I would like to perform appropriate actions based on the kind of instruction in a tool that I am working on. For example, I'd like to distinguish between memop instructions involving immediate vs register. While it appears that I would be

On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 11:05:44AM -0700, Talin said > So I've been using LLVM for about 4 years now, and I've posted a lot on this > list about specific issues. What I would like to do is step back for a > moment and give my "big picture" assessment of LLVM overall, particularly > with respect to developing a "managed" language like Java / C# or my own >

On Mar 4, 2009, at 1:33 PM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli wrote: > Hi Duncan, > > Thanks for your reply. > > I did try the method suggested by you. I got a foo.bc with -emit- > llvm switch. llc on foo.bc gets me the same assertion failure, as > you pointed out. > > Then I ran bugpoint to generate bugpoint-reduced-simplified.bc and > bugpoint-reduced-function.bc. My

Thanks for your reply, Paul. That seems to be a plausible explanation. I ended up adding code in my project to massage the output of llvm-config to the right paths based of the values of CMAKE_GENERATOR and build-mode. Bharadwaj On Dec 15, 2017 9:46 AM, "Robinson, Paul" <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: It may be that llvm-config simply doesn't understand a

That flag is specifically used by the foldImmediate optimization in the Peephole pass. We don't implement the TLI foldImmediate hook the peephole pass uses on x86 so we have no reason to set the flag on any instructions What are you trying to do? ~Craig On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 11:45 AM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I had

Luke Dalessandro wrote: > S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli wrote: >> $ ../../../src/llvm-gcc-4.2/configure >> --prefix=<llvm-root>/install/x86_64-arm/llvm-gcc-4.2 >> --program-prefix=llvm-x86_64-arm >> --enable-llvm=<llvm-root>/install/x86_64-arm/llvm >> --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-multilib >> --target=arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi > > I

Hi , Currently GobalIsel like FastIsel designed to use fallback to DAGIsel in case of failure. You can use -global-isel-abort=2 option. llc -global-isel -pass-remarks-missed="gisel-*" -global-isel-abort=2 simple_foo.ll Regards, Igor From: S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli [mailto:bharadwajy at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 03:36 To: Aditya Nandakumar <proaditya at

Why is it that @llvm.invariant.start requires the size argument to be a constant integer literal and does not accept constant expressions? For example the following IR: declare {}* @llvm.invariant.start(i64,i8*) define void @foo() { %1 = call {}* @llvm.invariant.start(i64 ptrtoint(i8* getelementptr(i8* %null, i32 1) to i64), i8* null) ret void } gives the following error from llvm-as:

S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli wrote: > > I am trying to build a x86_64 to ARM cross compiler. > > I configured, built and installed LLVM as follows: > > $ ../../../src/llvm/configure > --with-llvmgccdir=<llvm-root>/install/x86_64-arm/llvm-gcc-4.2 > --enable-optimized --enable-jit > --prefix=<llvm-root>/install/x86_64-arm/llvm >

Greetings, We are having some rights issues on Samba 3.6.18 running on Slackware64 14.0 (the official Slackware Package). One of our users is having access issues and I believe I have traced the problem to the following entry in the log.smbd: Primary group is 0 and contains 0 supplementary groups Issuing the groups command for this user returns the 8 Linux groups in which the user has

Hi Duncan, Thanks for your reply. I did try the method suggested by you. I got a foo.bc with -emit-llvm switch. llc on foo.bc gets me the same assertion failure, as you pointed out. Then I ran bugpoint to generate bugpoint-reduced-simplified.bc and bugpoint-reduced-function.bc. My previous experience is that if I compile either if them, I would get the same failure as I did with foo.bc. That is

Geoff Reedy wrote: > Why is it that @llvm.invariant.start requires the size argument to be a > constant integer literal and does not accept constant expressions? For > example the following IR: > > declare {}* @llvm.invariant.start(i64,i8*) > define void @foo() { > %1 = call {}* @llvm.invariant.start(i64 ptrtoint(i8* getelementptr(i8* > %null, i32 1) to i64), i8*

I believe if you pass(iirc) -pass-remarks-missed=“gisel-*”, it’ll print the instruction it failed to legalize. Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 11, 2017, at 6:44 PM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Thanks for your quick reply. > > Here its is: > > =========== > > ; ModuleID = 'simple_foo.c' > source_filename

I would like to generate the tags for LLVM sources to be used by emacs. I noticed that there is a tags target that can be specified to make to generate the tags file. It appears that the rules for this target are generated only with the specification of --with-tags option to configure script. However, I get the following errors respectively when I specify --with-tags or --with-tags=TAGS option to