search for: evaluatable

...t after a “step in” to inline_me, the user wants to look at an expression > spelled *ptr even though the actual_obj might not have a memory address > (because fields are SROA’d into registers, or whatever). This is where > DW_OP_implicit_pointer saves the day; *ptr and ptr->x are still evaluatable > expressions, which expressions are secretly indirecting through the DIE for > actual_obj. > > > > I think it is not widely applicable outside of that kind of scenario. > Any ideas why it wouldn't be more general to handle cases where the variable isn't named? Such as...

sses, that way autoloading works ok and the classes are found, but that see= ms a bit awkward. <br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid= rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br><br= >Note that it&#39;s a bit redundant to name your classes that way -- you<br= > can just as

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Matthew Curtis <mcurtis at codeaurora.org> wrote: > > Here's how I'm evaluating the expression (in my head): > > 00: Add(ZeroExtend(Truncate(Minus(AddRec(Start=0,Step=3)[n],3), i8), i32),3) > | > 01: Add(ZeroExtend(Truncate(Minus(AddRec(Start=0,Step=3)[0],3), i8), i32),3) >

On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 1:27 PM Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 14, 2019, at 1:21 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hey folks, > > > > Would you all mind having a bit of a design discussion around the > feature both at the DWARF level and the LLVM implementation? It seems like > what's

my understanding of `eval' behaviour is obviously incomplete. my question: usually `eval(expr)' and `eval(expr, envir=parent.frame())' should be identical. why does the last `eval' (yielding `r3') in this code _not_ evaluate in the local environment of function `f' but rather in the global environment (if `f' is called from there)?

...%for.body> 10: calls getZeroExtendExpr({0,+,3}<%for.body>, i32); 11: returns (zext i8 {0,+,3}<%for.body> to i32) 12: returns (zext i8 {0,+,3}<%for.body> to i32) This expression is (I believe) correct for %conv2. The intent of the patch is to construct the correct (evaluatable) expression for %result.03 being fed into the computation of %conv2. Does that make more sense? Matthew C. On 12/18/2012 12:54 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Matthew Curtis <mcurtis at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> Here's how I'm evaluating the expres...

I''m trying to install weborb in my applications but it is not working as you can see: C:\RoR\mijnapplication>ruby script/plugin install http://themidnightcoders.net:8 089/svn/weborb --force to reinstall + ./README + ./Rakefile + ./init.rb + ./install.rb + ./lib/AC_OETags.js + ./lib/InfoService.rb + ./lib/data-management-config.xml + ./lib/example.html + ./lib/example.mxml +

Dan, Thanks for the response ... On 12/17/2012 1:53 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Matthew Curtis <mcurtis at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> I wanted to get some feedback on this patch for ScalarEvolution. >> >> It addresses a performance problem I am seeing for simple benchmark. >> >> Starting with this C

...t after a “step in” to inline_me, the user wants to look at an expression > spelled *ptr even though the actual_obj might not have a memory address > (because fields are SROA’d into registers, or whatever). This is where > DW_OP_implicit_pointer saves the day; *ptr and ptr->x are still evaluatable > expressions, which expressions are secretly indirecting through the DIE for > actual_obj. > > > > I think it is not widely applicable outside of that kind of scenario. > > > > Any ideas why it wouldn't be more general to handle cases where the > variable isn...

...tion is needed or not. I would like for that not to be the case, but that is a far bigger change. It also points out that an expression being a valid label definition or not can change in a way that is hard to see during the change itself: We can have an arbitrarily nested expression that goes from evaluatable to requiring a relocation when the section of a global object is changed. That in turn puts the validity check in the verifier, even we constraint ConstantExprs. In other words, another possible representation would be * GlobalsAlias point to ConstantExpr * The expression is completely unconstrai...

Bringing the discussion to llvmdev. For the purposed of this discussion, object files can be thought as having just a few thing we care about: data, labels and relocations. Data is what at llvm ir would be just the contents of variables or functions. Relocations are utilities to compute the data at link time when it is not possible to do so earlier. For example, to compute a pcrel relocation we