Hi, the following llvm-ir is manipulated by the optimizers: %target2 = getelementptr %.string %result, i32 0, i32 3, i32 %len1 (%_.string = type {i32, i32, i32, [0 x i8]}) the last parameter i32 %len1 is replaced by i32 0 by the optimizers. (both, 2.9 and 2.8). When i turn optmization off, it works correctly. How can i use an optimizer-safe dynamic indexing of arrays? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110915/b1357e8f/attachment.html>
Hi,> the following llvm-ir is manipulated by the optimizers: > %target2 = getelementptr %.string %result, i32 0, i32 3, i32 %len1 > (%_.string = type {i32, i32, i32, [0 x i8]}) > > the last parameter i32 %len1 is replaced by i32 0 by the optimizers. (both, 2.9 > and 2.8). When i turn optmization off, it works correctly. > How can i use an optimizer-safe dynamic indexing of arrays?there is not enough information to say why the optimizers are doing this. Please send a complete testcase. Ciao, Duncan.
Maybe Matching Threads
- combine the data frames into comma separated list.
- Issue with Adaptec AIC79XX module and 2.6-xen kernel
- Skip error in downloading file in loop
- [Bug 1144] New: set add always returns false or otherwise ends evaluation
- [Resolved] combine the data frames into comma separated list.