[cfe-dev] Clang should natively support fortran

[Norman Rink via cfe-dev]

At the risk of stating the obvious, have people seen this:

https://github.com/llvm-flang


Does anyone have any experience with ³flang²? Is it maintained?

Best,

Norman


On 23/06/16 04:19, "cfe-dev on behalf of via cfe-dev"
<cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

>Send cfe-dev mailing list submissions to
>	cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	cfe-dev-request at lists.llvm.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	cfe-dev-owner at lists.llvm.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of cfe-dev digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. [OT] Re:  Clang should natively support fortran
>      (C Bergström via cfe-dev)
>   2. Re: [OT] Re:  Clang should natively support fortran
>      (Yuri via cfe-dev)
>   3. Re: Clang should natively support fortran
>      (Renato Golin via cfe-dev)
>   4. Re: [llvm-dev] 3.8.1-final has been tagged
>      (Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev)
>   5. Re: Clang should natively support fortran (Yuri via cfe-dev)
>   6. Re: Clang should natively support fortran (Lei Zhang via cfe-dev)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 07:07:31 +0800
>From: C Bergström via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>To: Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com>
>Cc: clang developer list <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>Subject: [cfe-dev] [OT] Re:  Clang should natively support fortran
>Message-ID:
>	<CAOnawYrkk90hYC19nTYn1mt3MxRpTuLZR1ZOeHRKypOSr14JEA at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com> wrote:
>> On 06/22/2016 15:31, C Bergström wrote:
>>
>> This is going down a rabbit hole pretty far off topic, but the most
>> sincere answer I can give
>> --------
>> Linux, OSX and Windows
>>
>> I'm a pretty strong Fortran advocate and even I wouldn't have any
>> argument about trying to keep Fortran support in the FBSD base system.
>> Why???!
>>
>> Does FBSD have optimized math libraries?
>> GPGPU support?
>> IB drivers support?
>> Is anyone shipping HPC solutions for FreeBSD
>> Is anyone actually testing the codes..
>> (I won't even go into the kernel side of things..)
>>
>> In general I don't even know if typical common HPC codes will build on
>> FBSD... I have a strong doubt anyone tests it.
>>
>> Time and energy is probably better spent focusing on improving things
>> your community actually needs.
>>
>>
>> I disagree.
>>
>>
>> You seem to focus on the business use of the OS, and ignore some other
>>uses.
>> Do you know about Jupyter notebook software (http://jupyter.org)? It
>>allows
>> to create the interactive math- and physics-based books that allow the
>> reader to explore and experiment with formulas and computations right
>>inside
>> the book? A lot of Jupyter uses fortran-based libraries in the
>>background.
>
>>From a user perspective jupyter appears to be a web app and you'd only
>need Chrome or some modern browser.. (wait does FreeBSB even have
>Chrome...). So unless I'm mistaken, this would only matter if their
>servers are running FreeBSD. (Which I doubt)
>
>> And Jupiter is a pretty cool thing. There is also the symbolic computer
>> algebra Cadabra2 (http://cadabra.science) that also uses fortran in the
>> background. And many other packages use fortran too.
>>
>>
>> FreeBSD has a lot of advantages compared to Linux, OSX and Windows. For
>> example, on FreeBSD you can have a 100% open source system
>
>Licensing is a matter of opinion and not a technical merit. Please
>lets not bring religion into the discussion.
>
>, and all Linux
>> distros always mix in some random third party-built binaries. This is a
>> security risk. FreeBSD doesn't just grab the latest versions of packages
>> from github like linux distros do. This is another security risk.
>
>I'm very far from linux advocate, but this is disappointing FUD
>
>You can't
>> just blow this off, these are very significant advantages. And how can
>>you
>> make a case for the business use of Windows or OSX on a computation
>>farm?
>
>Windows and OSX Fortran is mostly from the development side. If you
>were a scientist and actually writing Fortran code every day you may
>understand this.
>
>
>> Why add the licensing costs? It just doesn't make sense to me.
>>
>>
>> Following your logic, nobody should do any new things because there is
>>some
>> gigantic industry already doing things some other way. Why even develop
>> clang if there is gcc that already compiles everything fine?
>
>Maybe this is just confusion between English and your native language..
>
>I was just trying to say that FreeBSD probably has more important
>things to focus on. Even if clang had Fortran support, I doubt anyone
>would use FreeBSD as their platform for building a cluster or
>scientific codes development.
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 16:25:45 -0700
>From: Yuri via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>To: C Bergström <cbergstrom at pathscale.com>
>Cc: clang developer list <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [OT] Re:  Clang should natively support fortran
>Message-ID: <16f5d067-e25d-6c20-679c-32845ede0010 at rawbw.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
>On 06/22/2016 16:07, C Bergström wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com> wrote:
>>
>> >From a user perspective jupyter appears to be a web app and you'd only
>> need Chrome or some modern browser.. (wait does FreeBSB even have
>> Chrome...). So unless I'm mistaken, this would only matter if their
>> servers are running FreeBSD. (Which I doubt)
>
>There is no user vs. "them", it is the local web server serving the
>local client.
>
>>> And Jupiter is a pretty cool thing. There is also the symbolic computer
>>> algebra Cadabra2 (http://cadabra.science) that also uses fortran in the
>>> background. And many other packages use fortran too.
>>>
>>>
>>> FreeBSD has a lot of advantages compared to Linux, OSX and Windows. For
>>> example, on FreeBSD you can have a 100% open source system
>> Licensing is a matter of opinion and not a technical merit. Please
>> lets not bring religion into the discussion.
>
>I am not religious. I am just saying that business reasoning is a thing
>in itself, which has no relation to what is technically superior.
>
>
>>
>> , and all Linux
>>> distros always mix in some random third party-built binaries. This is a
>>> security risk. FreeBSD doesn't just grab the latest versions of
>>>packages
>>> from github like linux distros do. This is another security risk.
>> I'm very far from linux advocate, but this is disappointing FUD
>
>No it isn't, it is factually correct. You just never looked how linux
>packages are built.
>
>
>>
>> You can't
>>> just blow this off, these are very significant advantages. And how can
>>>you
>>> make a case for the business use of Windows or OSX on a computation
>>>farm?
>> Windows and OSX Fortran is mostly from the development side. If you
>> were a scientist and actually writing Fortran code every day you may
>> understand this.
>
>Sorry, I don't know what are you talking about.
>
>
>>> Why add the licensing costs? It just doesn't make sense to me.
>>>
>>>
>>> Following your logic, nobody should do any new things because there is
>>>some
>>> gigantic industry already doing things some other way. Why even develop
>>> clang if there is gcc that already compiles everything fine?
>> Maybe this is just confusion between English and your native language..
>
>English is my native language. Maybe it's your native language, Mr.
>Bergström, that is in the way?
>
>
>> I was just trying to say that FreeBSD probably has more important
>> things to focus on. Even if clang had Fortran support, I doubt anyone
>> would use FreeBSD as their platform for building a cluster or
>> scientific codes development.
>
>
>You said this already, and I said that I respectfully disagreed.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Yuri
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:36:07 +0100
>From: Renato Golin via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>To: Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com>
>Cc: Ed Maste <emaste at freebsd.org>, Clang Dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>,
>	Andrew Turner <andrew at fubar.geek.nz>
>Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] Clang should natively support fortran
>Message-ID:
>	<CAMSE1kcP1idHuDF_hiG5uDsyZBrEJ8+5BS4njJkmUpdFp47YAg at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>On 22 June 2016 at 23:15, Yuri via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> I guess the real question is: what is the best replacement of an unwind
>>API?
>> Does clang/llvm supply it? Or what is the best solution of this problem?
>
>LLVM has a sub-project called libunwind (same as the other one, sorry
>for the bad naming).
>
>http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/libunwind/trunk/
>
>It's fairly active and mostly functional. I believe FreeBSD may
>already use it (or some other non-gcc one) internally with Clang, so
>you should just try to find it. It works pretty well with Compiler-RT
>and libc++, and I believe both are also aready being used by Clang in
>FreeBSD.
>
>I have no idea, though, if the ageing GCC in FreeBSD will work with
>libunwind, libc++ or compiler-RT. Actually, I'd be very surprised if
>it did... :(
>
>I'm copying some FreeBSD folks to chime in.
>
>cheers,
>--renato
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 17:55:30 -0700
>From: Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>To: Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net>
>Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, Release-testers
>	<release-testers at lists.llvm.org>, cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] 3.8.1-final has been tagged
>Message-ID:
>	<CAB8jPhdHRbhCqAZQA0-uVyBg6etjQsic0QcmhEkwP7+w88iS1A at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev
><llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> I've tagged 3.8.1-final, so testers can start building the final
>> binaries.
>
>Windows is ready: (sha1sum)
>
>ef70473d25b6d05a46d37a985766cf31274e1088  LLVM-3.8.1-win32.exe
>f11f075ea2d3ad1344c4af49e44b5fd8ddb65eb1  LLVM-3.8.1-win64.exe
>
>It was built with the attached batch file.
>
>Cheers,
>Hans
>-------------- next part --------------
>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>Name: build_llvm_381._bat_
>Type: application/octet-stream
>Size: 2905 bytes
>Desc: not available
>URL: 
><http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20160622/2b31a17f/att
>achment-0001.obj>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 18:14:04 -0700
>From: Yuri via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>To: Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
>Cc: Ed Maste <emaste at freebsd.org>, Clang Dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>,
>	Andrew Turner <andrew at fubar.geek.nz>
>Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] Clang should natively support fortran
>Message-ID: <68852bde-b468-2ee3-504e-1dc20cbfd170 at rawbw.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
>On 06/22/2016 16:36, Renato Golin wrote:
>> LLVM has a sub-project called libunwind (same as the other one, sorry
>> for the bad naming).
>>
>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/libunwind/trunk/
>>
>> It's fairly active and mostly functional. I believe FreeBSD may
>> already use it (or some other non-gcc one) internally with Clang, so
>> you should just try to find it. It works pretty well with Compiler-RT
>> and libc++, and I believe both are also aready being used by Clang in
>> FreeBSD.
>>
>> I have no idea, though, if the ageing GCC in FreeBSD will work with
>> libunwind, libc++ or compiler-RT. Actually, I'd be very surprised if
>> it did...:(
>>
>> I'm copying some FreeBSD folks to chime in.
>
>
>libunwind is GPLv3-licensed, so it is unusable in the system that has
>GPL-averse license policy, like FreeBSD.
>
>Is there a way to dual-license it with the second license being the same
>as llvm has?
>
>
>Yuri
>
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: 
><http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20160622/95fd9678/att
>achment-0001.html>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 10:23:16 +0800
>From: Lei Zhang via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>To: Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com>
>Cc: Clang Dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>, Ed Maste <emaste at freebsd.org>,
>	Andrew Turner <andrew at fubar.geek.nz>
>Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] Clang should natively support fortran
>Message-ID:
>	<CAOYuCc3KZkWtOzVu+By6FoOM5tvkjgE70B3LGkby-ix89P7ehw at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>2016-06-23 9:14 GMT+08:00 Yuri via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>:
>> On 06/22/2016 16:36, Renato Golin wrote:
>>
>> LLVM has a sub-project called libunwind (same as the other one, sorry
>> for the bad naming).
>>
>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/libunwind/trunk/
>>
>> It's fairly active and mostly functional. I believe FreeBSD may
>> already use it (or some other non-gcc one) internally with Clang, so
>> you should just try to find it. It works pretty well with Compiler-RT
>> and libc++, and I believe both are also aready being used by Clang in
>> FreeBSD.
>>
>> I have no idea, though, if the ageing GCC in FreeBSD will work with
>> libunwind, libc++ or compiler-RT. Actually, I'd be very surprised if
>> it did... :(
>>
>> I'm copying some FreeBSD folks to chime in.
>>
>>
>> libunwind is GPLv3-licensed, so it is unusable in the system that has
>> GPL-averse license policy, like FreeBSD.
>
>I guess you're mistaking LLVM's libunwind for the other one with the same
>name:
>
>http://blog.llvm.org/2013/10/new-libunwind-implementation-in-libcabi.html
>
>
>Lei
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Subject: Digest Footer
>
>_______________________________________________
>cfe-dev mailing list
>cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of cfe-dev Digest, Vol 108, Issue 117
>*****************************************