digitalmars.D.ldc - Error compiling LDC (again...)
- matovitch (61/61) Mar 15 2015 Hi,
- Kai Nacke (9/10) Mar 15 2015 You are using LLVM trunk and I have not yet fixed all errors due
- matovitch (9/20) Mar 15 2015 Hi Kai !
- matovitch (4/29) Mar 15 2015 5 minutes later...I am clearly not brave enough neither do I know
- Kai Nacke (5/8) Mar 15 2015 The LDC team is always interested in pull requests!
- Kai Nacke (7/32) Mar 16 2015 Hi Matovitch,
- matovitch (8/43) Mar 16 2015 Hi Kai,
- Dan Olson (2/5) Mar 16 2015 Hi matovitch. I think HEAD is called 3.7 until it is released.
- Kai Nacke (12/20) Mar 16 2015 Yes, that's true. LLVM head is the development stream for version
- matovitch (9/31) Mar 16 2015 Hi Kai,
- matovitch (3/4) Mar 16 2015 Nope, there are absolutely no tags (even 3.6) at least on the git
- Kai Nacke (12/16) Mar 16 2015 For some legal reason, LLVM development uses SVN. Well, everybody
- Johan Engelen (4/7) Mar 16 2015 I was using LLVM head too, but switching to 3.6 now.
Hi,
Me again (it's been some time but it's about the same
problem)...I tried to compile LDC with the knew LLVM/clang I just
compile and stumble (not sure of the orthographe here) upon this
make error :
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/gen/dvalue.cpp:21:13: warning: ‘bool
checkVarValueType(llvm::Type*, bool)’ defined but not used
[-Wunused-function]
static bool checkVarValueType(LLType* t, bool extraDeref)
^
[ 9%] Building CXX object
CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/warnings.cpp.o
[ 9%] Building CXX object
CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/typinf.cpp.o
[ 9%] Building CXX object
CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/abi-win64.cpp.o
[ 9%] Building CXX object
CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/llvmhelpers.cpp.o
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/gen/llvmhelpers.cpp: In function
‘DValue* DtoCastPtr(Loc&, DValue*, Type*)’:
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/gen/llvmhelpers.cpp:582:11: warning:
unused variable ‘fromtype’ [-Wunused-variable]
Type* fromtype = val->getType()->toBasetype();
^
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/gen/llvmhelpers.cpp: In function
‘llvm::Constant* DtoConstExpInit(Loc&, Type*, Expression*)’:
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/gen/llvmhelpers.cpp:1368:28: warning:
unused variable ‘source’ [-Wunused-variable]
llvm::IntegerType* source =
llvm::cast<llvm::IntegerType>(llType);
^
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/gen/llvmhelpers.cpp: In function
‘DValue* DtoSymbolAddress(Loc&, Type*, Declaration*)’:
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/gen/llvmhelpers.cpp:1794:33: warning:
unused variable ‘t’ [-Wunused-variable]
llvm::Type* t =
llvm::cast<llvm::PointerType>(val->getType())->getElementType();
^
[ 9%] Building CXX object
CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/asmstmt.cpp.o
[ 9%] Building CXX object
CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/binops.cpp.o
[ 9%] Building CXX object
CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/optimizer.cpp.o
In file included from
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/gen/optimizer.cpp:12:0:
/home/cbrugel/Downloads/ldc/./gen/cl_helpers.h:32:11: error:
cannot derive from ‘final’ base ‘llvm::cl::parser<bool>’ in
derived type ‘opts::FlagParser’
class FlagParser : public cl::parser<bool> {
^
CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/build.make:1883: recipe for target
'CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/optimizer.cpp.o' failed
make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/gen/optimizer.cpp.o] Error
1
CMakeFiles/Makefile2:61: recipe for target
'CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/all' failed
make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/LDCShared.dir/all] Error 2
Makefile:143: recipe for target 'all' failed
make: *** [all] Error 2
Any idea ? Anyway thanks a lot in advance for your help ! :)
Mar 15 2015
Hi Matovitch! On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:10:49 UTC, matovitch wrote:Any idea ? Anyway thanks a lot in advance for your help ! :)You are using LLVM trunk and I have not yet fixed all errors due to refactoring in the framework. Quick fix: Comment out the FlagParser implementation and add this typedef: typedef cl::parser<bool> FlagParser; Regards, Kai
Mar 15 2015
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:24:05 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:Hi Matovitch! On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:10:49 UTC, matovitch wrote:Hi Kai ! Thanks for your help and more generally for your work on LDC. I will probably encounter some other errors then...we'll see (...look back at his terminal...Yes ideed !). I don't know if someone would be interested by a temporary patch if ever I achive to build ldc... Regards, MatovitchAny idea ? Anyway thanks a lot in advance for your help ! :)You are using LLVM trunk and I have not yet fixed all errors due to refactoring in the framework. Quick fix: Comment out the FlagParser implementation and add this typedef: typedef cl::parser<bool> FlagParser; Regards, Kai
Mar 15 2015
"matovitch" <camille.brugel laposte.net> On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:37:13 UTC, matovitch wrote:On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:24:05 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:5 minutes later...I am clearly not brave enough neither do I know llvm (well enougth) at all. I will use the right tag and try again. As we said in France for you : Bon courage !Hi Matovitch! On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:10:49 UTC, matovitch wrote:Hi Kai ! Thanks for your help and more generally for your work on LDC. I will probably encounter some other errors then...we'll see (...look back at his terminal...Yes ideed !). I don't know if someone would be interested by a temporary patch if ever I achive to build ldc... Regards, MatovitchAny idea ? Anyway thanks a lot in advance for your help ! :)You are using LLVM trunk and I have not yet fixed all errors due to refactoring in the framework. Quick fix: Comment out the FlagParser implementation and add this typedef: typedef cl::parser<bool> FlagParser; Regards, Kai
Mar 15 2015
Hi Matovitch! On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:37:13 UTC, matovitch wrote:(...look back at his terminal...Yes ideed !). I don't know if someone would be interested by a temporary patch if ever I achive to build ldc...The LDC team is always interested in pull requests! Regards, Kai
Mar 15 2015
On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:37:13 UTC, matovitch wrote:On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:24:05 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:Hi Matovitch, I have fixed all compile errors with LLVM 3.7 (from Sunday morning :-) ). Maybe you want to give it a try... Regards, KaiHi Matovitch! On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:10:49 UTC, matovitch wrote:Hi Kai ! Thanks for your help and more generally for your work on LDC. I will probably encounter some other errors then...we'll see (...look back at his terminal...Yes ideed !). I don't know if someone would be interested by a temporary patch if ever I achive to build ldc... Regards, MatovitchAny idea ? Anyway thanks a lot in advance for your help ! :)You are using LLVM trunk and I have not yet fixed all errors due to refactoring in the framework. Quick fix: Comment out the FlagParser implementation and add this typedef: typedef cl::parser<bool> FlagParser; Regards, Kai
Mar 16 2015
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 07:00:32 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:37:13 UTC, matovitch wrote:Hi Kai, Awesome ! I will try this evenning (in about 8 hours) and let you know (I compiled LLVM from the HEAD there is no (3.7) tags on the git mirror so I am not sure of what you mean by 3.7). Thanks for your work ! Regards, MatovitchOn Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:24:05 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:Hi Matovitch, I have fixed all compile errors with LLVM 3.7 (from Sunday morning :-) ). Maybe you want to give it a try... Regards, KaiHi Matovitch! On Sunday, 15 March 2015 at 14:10:49 UTC, matovitch wrote:Hi Kai ! Thanks for your help and more generally for your work on LDC. I will probably encounter some other errors then...we'll see (...look back at his terminal...Yes ideed !). I don't know if someone would be interested by a temporary patch if ever I achive to build ldc... Regards, MatovitchAny idea ? Anyway thanks a lot in advance for your help ! :)You are using LLVM trunk and I have not yet fixed all errors due to refactoring in the framework. Quick fix: Comment out the FlagParser implementation and add this typedef: typedef cl::parser<bool> FlagParser; Regards, Kai
Mar 16 2015
"matovitch" <camille.brugel laposte.net> writes:Awesome ! I will try this evenning (in about 8 hours) and let you know (I compiled LLVM from the HEAD there is no (3.7) tags on the git mirror so I am not sure of what you mean by 3.7). Thanks for your workHi matovitch. I think HEAD is called 3.7 until it is released.
Mar 16 2015
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 14:12:53 UTC, Dan Olson wrote:"matovitch" <camille.brugel laposte.net> writes:Yes, that's true. LLVM head is the development stream for version 3.7, which will be released in autumn. The LLVM people always refactor and improve things. That's why you sometimes get compile errors when building ldc. I try to keep up with the LLVM development, but sometimes I need simply more time... I don't know why you are using LLVM head - if you only want to follow LDC development then you can/should use LLVM 3.6. (There is a tag/branch for 3.6). Regards, KaiAwesome ! I will try this evenning (in about 8 hours) and let you know (I compiled LLVM from the HEAD there is no (3.7) tags on the git mirror so I am not sure of what you mean by 3.7). Thanks for your workHi matovitch. I think HEAD is called 3.7 until it is released.
Mar 16 2015
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 17:49:45 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 14:12:53 UTC, Dan Olson wrote:Hi Kai, It compiles ! Not without a fair amount of warnings though...Well I had no good reasons to use llvm HEAD. I just bought and mount my first PC and wanted to test a large compilation, then with llvm compiled I though why not trying to compile ldc with it. Now ready to code some D ! :D Thanks again for your help, Matovitch"matovitch" <camille.brugel laposte.net> writes:Yes, that's true. LLVM head is the development stream for version 3.7, which will be released in autumn. The LLVM people always refactor and improve things. That's why you sometimes get compile errors when building ldc. I try to keep up with the LLVM development, but sometimes I need simply more time... I don't know why you are using LLVM head - if you only want to follow LDC development then you can/should use LLVM 3.6. (There is a tag/branch for 3.6). Regards, KaiAwesome ! I will try this evenning (in about 8 hours) and let you know (I compiled LLVM from the HEAD there is no (3.7) tags on the git mirror so I am not sure of what you mean by 3.7). Thanks for your workHi matovitch. I think HEAD is called 3.7 until it is released.
Mar 16 2015
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 17:49:45 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:(There is a tag/branch for 3.6).Nope, there are absolutely no tags (even 3.6) at least on the git mirror I cloned (wich looked like the official one).
Mar 16 2015
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 18:04:21 UTC, matovitch wrote:On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 17:49:45 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:For some legal reason, LLVM development uses SVN. Well, everybody uses the git mirror but the source of truth is SVN. The release-36 branch contains the current LLVM 3.6 release (and maybe already some commits for 3.6.1 which is planned for April/May). Because the branch is used for the major release / dot release, the API is kept stable. You can use this branch - if it breaks something then it is a major bug which should be reported to the LLVM mailing list. (You can also download the source tar. ;-) Regards, Kai(There is a tag/branch for 3.6).Nope, there are absolutely no tags (even 3.6) at least on the git mirror I cloned (wich looked like the official one).
Mar 16 2015
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 17:49:45 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:I don't know why you are using LLVM head - if you only want to follow LDC development then you can/should use LLVM 3.6. (There is a tag/branch for 3.6).I was using LLVM head too, but switching to 3.6 now. I want to work on LDC's exception handling on Win64, is there a difference between 3.6 and 3.7 in that case?
Mar 16 2015
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 21:01:02 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 17:49:45 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:The Google guys work on implementing real Structured Exception Handling for Win64. There are already changes in 3.7 and you can expect that most of the implementation will be in 3.7. (Same is true for clang.) The current EH implementation uses the Windows runtime functions but Dwarf EH info. This is similar to the way gcc works on Win64. Regards, KaiI don't know why you are using LLVM head - if you only want to follow LDC development then you can/should use LLVM 3.6. (There is a tag/branch for 3.6).I was using LLVM head too, but switching to 3.6 now. I want to work on LDC's exception handling on Win64, is there a difference between 3.6 and 3.7 in that case?
Mar 16 2015
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 21:01:02 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote:On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 17:49:45 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:E.g. see http://reviews.llvm.org/D7865 for a change between 3.6 and 3.7. Regards, KaiI don't know why you are using LLVM head - if you only want to follow LDC development then you can/should use LLVM 3.6. (There is a tag/branch for 3.6).I was using LLVM head too, but switching to 3.6 now. I want to work on LDC's exception handling on Win64, is there a difference between 3.6 and 3.7 in that case?
Mar 17 2015