On Friday 26 September 2008 16:59, Chris Lattner wrote:> On Sep 26, 2008, at 8:43 AM, David Greene wrote: > >> Do you have a testcase? It sounds like something that would be easy > >> to fix. > > > > I have a fix (yes, it was trivial). I'll have to see about a > > testcase as it's > > proprietary code. > > Usually, proprietary testcases can be reduced and simplified to the > point where they are innocuous,Yep, that's what I'm trying to do. -Dave
On Sep 29, 2008, at 9:21 AM, David Greene wrote:>> Usually, proprietary testcases can be reduced and simplified to the >> point where they are innocuous, > > Yep, that's what I'm trying to do.Have you run delta?
On Monday 29 September 2008 19:25, Mike Stump wrote:> On Sep 29, 2008, at 9:21 AM, David Greene wrote: > >> Usually, proprietary testcases can be reduced and simplified to the > >> point where they are innocuous, > > > > Yep, that's what I'm trying to do. > > Have you run delta?Delta doesn't apply. I'm going to try bugpoint. -Dave
Maybe Matching Threads
- [LLVMdev] Cannot Select ConstantFP on x86
- [LLVMdev] Cannot Select ConstantFP on x86
- [LLVMdev] Cannot Select ConstantFP on x86
- [LLVMdev] svn pre-commit hook: help needed
- [LLVMdev] LLVM ERROR: Cannot yet select: 0x2625340: f64 = ConstantFP<3.540000e+02> :What is it?