No, disabling CPP_BACKEND made no difference. It's not working. This bug has been introduced before the release of 2.27.2.
On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 5:04 PM Kjetil Matheussen <[email protected]> wrote: > > As far as I can see, that Makefile does exactly the same as me, EXCEPT > that I also compile in CPP_BACKEND. > Does CPP_BACKEND enable BUILD_LLVM? > > On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 4:54 PM Stéphane Letz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Look at this Makefile for a way to compile libfaust with Interp backend > > without LLVM; > > > > https://github.com/VCVRack/VCV-Prototype/blob/faust/Makefile > > > > Stéphane > > > > > Le 27 déc. 2020 à 10:51, Kjetil Matheussen <[email protected]> a > > > écrit : > > > > > > Thank you. I haven't tried HEAD yet, but in 2.27.2 the LLVM > > > interpreter was compiled in when I tried. > > > > > > These lines are in > > > compiler/generator/interpreter/interpreter_dsp_aux.hh in 2.27.2: > > > " > > > #ifdef MACHINE > > > #include "fbc_cpp_compiler.hh" > > > #include "fbc_llvm_compiler.hh" > > > #endif > > > " > > > > > > And this line is in /build/interp/CMakeList.txt: > > > " > > > set( MACHINEDEFS -DMACHINE -D${LLVM_VERSION}) > > > " > > > > > > I don't see the lines in > > > compiler/generator/interpreter/interpreter_dsp_aux.hh in HEAD though, > > > so hopefully it's been fixed. > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 10:16 AM Stéphane Letz <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> The LLVM code in the Interp backend is not activated by default, so you > > >> should be able to compile a version of libfaust using Interp backend > > >> with no LLVM dependency. > > >> > > >> Stéphane > > >> > > >>> Le 26 déc. 2020 à 15:56, Kjetil Matheussen <[email protected]> a > > >>> écrit : > > >>> > > >>> Hi, > > >>> > > >>> Seems like the interpreter in libfaust 2.27.2 requires LLVM. Is this > > >>> how it's going to be in the future, or would it be safe to enable the > > >>> old non-LLVM interpreter? (I saw there was a hardcoded c-macro that > > >>> perhaps can be used to get the old version back.) > > >>> > > >>> The main reason I don't want LLVM is because it didn't work to include > > >>> LLVM binaries last time I tried (incompatible ABM between linux > > >>> distributions), plus that LLVM crashes on windows32. I haven't checked > > >>> yet if these problems are there for the LLVM interpreter though. > > >>> > > >>> Also, a big advantage for the interpreter is the low "compilation" > > >>> time. Is the latency equally low for the LLVM interpreter? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> Faudiostream-devel mailing list > > >>> [email protected] > > >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/faudiostream-devel > > >> > > _______________________________________________ Faudiostream-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/faudiostream-devel
