STL VS llvm-project

As a reminder (you've probably seen this, but maybe not everyone), I am still accepting bug bash reports, if anyone is super excited about trying out the code.

There are indeed bugs, but it's getting close to handling the entire Standard Library. I'm still accepting STL Modules Bug Bash reports, if you can find novel bugs (see the tracking issue microsoft/STL#1694 for known bugs).

Standard Library Modules are coming soon. You can experiment with them (and report issues) by following the instructions at https://github.com/StephanTLavavej/STL/wiki/Standard-Library-Modules-Bug-Bash .

C++23 Standard Library Modules were just officially accepted into the Working Paper. My bug bash for the implementation-in-progress was successful, with many great bugs reported (and most worked around, to the limit of my ability in the library). VS 2022 17.4 Preview 1, released today, contains more fixes for named modules. I'm now close to having a PR prepared for review - just need to add automated testing and do some setup work (as we need to ship a new directory with new files). I can't promise anything yet, but I am very tentatively hopeful that we'll be able to merge this for 17.5.

Agreed - I'm running the Standard Library Modules Bug Bash until end of day today, but I'll continue to accept bug reports afterwards (and will hopefully have time to create a full PR for modules soon).

They should! If you use MSVC as one of your compilers, can you try my upcoming implementation of Standard Library Modules? My bug bash is running for another week, and getting bug reports will help us fix issues in the compiler and library so modules will be usable sooner. (That is, bugs that affect import std; will likely affect people writing their own named modules too.)

If you use MSVC, can you help me test them in the modules bug bash I'm running for the next 2 weeks?

'Computer Architeture: A Quantitative Apporach" and/or more specific design types (mips, arm, etc) can be found under the Morgan Kaufmann Series in Computer Architeture and Design.

"Getting Started with LLVM Core Libraries: Get to Grips With Llvm Essentials and Use the Core Libraries to Build Advanced Tools "

"The Architecture of Open Source Applications (Volume 1) : LLVM" https://aosabook.org/en/v1/llvm.html

"Tourist Guide to LLVM source code" : https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1453

llvm home page : https://llvm.org/

llvm tutorial : https://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/

llvm reference : https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html

learn by examples : C source code to 'llvm' bitcode : https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9148890/how-to-make-clan...

See

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/88344

https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/flang-new-how-to-forc...

You can never mistake type_declaration with an identifier, otherwise the program will not work. Aside from that constraint, you are free to name them whatever you like, there is no one standard, and each parser has it own naming conventions, unless you are planning to use something like LLVM. If you are interested, you can see examples of naming in different language parsers in the AST Explorer.

> There is one way to make the LLVM JIT compiler more usable, but I fear it’s going to take years to be implemented: being able to cache and reuse compiled queries.

Actually, it's implemented in LLVM for years :) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a98546ebcd2a692e...

> It's true, this was a CVE in Rust and not a CVE in C++, but only because C++ doesn't regard the issue as a problem at all. The problem definitely exists in C++, but it's not acknowledged as a problem, let alone fixed.

Can you find a link that substantiates your claim? You're throwing out some heavy accusations here that don't seem to match reality at all.

Case in point, this was fixed in both major C++ libraries:

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/ebf6175464768983a2d...

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4f67a909902d8ab9...

So what C++ community refused to regard this as an issue and refused to fix it? Where is your supporting evidence for your claims?

For everyone else looking for the magic in this almost 7k lines monster, look at line 6610 [1].

[1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/8ec28af8eaff5acd0d...

Through value tracking. It's actually LLVM that does this, GCC probably does it as well, so in theory explicit bounds checks in regular C code would also be removed by the compiler.

How it works exactly I don't know, and apparently it's so complex that it requires over 9000 lines of C++ to express:

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/llvm/lib/Anal...

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/flang/docs/F2...

• Go • Rust • Lua • pure C (sans C++) • 6502 assembly • WebAssembly • compiler backends, like LLVM or Cranelift