[clang] [libcxxabi] [llvm] Add support for WASI builds (PR #91051)

2024-06-08 Thread Luca Versari via cfe-commits
https://github.com/veluca93 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91051 >From a573b261c878c26e74831b101287945b6c414fc9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Luca Versari Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 15:42:57 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Adapt the build system for WASI. --- clang/CMakeLists.txt

[clang] [libcxxabi] [llvm] Add support for WASI builds (PR #91051)

2024-06-12 Thread Luca Versari via cfe-commits
https://github.com/veluca93 closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91051 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [libcxxabi] [llvm] Add support for WASI builds (PR #91051)

2024-06-12 Thread Luca Versari via cfe-commits
veluca93 wrote: Will close this PR for now waiting for the other one to go through - if that does not happen, feel free to reopen it! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91051 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists

[clang] [libcxxabi] [llvm] Add support for WASI builds (PR #91051)

2024-05-04 Thread Luca Versari via cfe-commits
https://github.com/veluca93 created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91051 This PR modifies the LLVM source code to compile (and run) in a WASI environment. The question of whether having WASI support in LLVM is one that doesn't have a clear answer for me (although of course I can se

[clang] [libcxxabi] [llvm] Add support for WASI builds (PR #91051)

2024-05-16 Thread Luca Versari via cfe-commits
veluca93 wrote: Ping (I suspect that the assigned reviewers are likely not the most appropriate, but I would be unsure on how to change them and to whom) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91051 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.l

[clang] [libcxxabi] [llvm] Add support for WASI builds (PR #91051)

2024-05-20 Thread Luca Versari via cfe-commits
veluca93 wrote: > https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-building-llvm-for-webassembly/79073 and PR > #92677 also just arrived at the scene with a different take on implementing > the same thing. Looks like there's significant interest in this area! That's cool! That PR seems significantly more poli