Ouch! Didn't see that. So at the risk of irritating those still in the process of baking 2.7, what is the sanction way of doing heap allocation going forward? :-) Garrison On Dec 7, 2009, at 11:18, Chris Lattner wrote:> > On Dec 7, 2009, at 2:13 AM, Florian Merz wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> I noticed that MallocInst and FreeInst have been removed from the LLVM IR as >> well as the language reference[1]. May I propose that at least some >> placeholder is left in that document telling the reader that these >> instructions have been removed. This should be kept in at least until there is >> one official release that does not support these instructions anymore. >> The same goes for the addition of the indirect branch instruction. A note in >> the language reference would be nice telling the reader when this instruction >> has been added to the language. > > Hi Florian, > > The documentation for LLVM is intended to describe the state of the system without a historical view. To get the historical view we put major changes in the release notes. These haven't been written yet for 2.7 though. > > -Chris > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
On Dec 7, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Garrison Venn wrote:> Ouch! Didn't see that. So at the risk of irritating those still in > the process of baking 2.7, what is the sanction way of doing heap > allocation going forward? :-)No, we only support stack allocation in LLVM IR now. :-) You can call out to normal malloc and free, just like any external function. -Chris> > Garrison > > On Dec 7, 2009, at 11:18, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> >> On Dec 7, 2009, at 2:13 AM, Florian Merz wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I noticed that MallocInst and FreeInst have been removed from the >>> LLVM IR as >>> well as the language reference[1]. May I propose that at least some >>> placeholder is left in that document telling the reader that these >>> instructions have been removed. This should be kept in at least >>> until there is >>> one official release that does not support these instructions >>> anymore. >>> The same goes for the addition of the indirect branch instruction. >>> A note in >>> the language reference would be nice telling the reader when this >>> instruction >>> has been added to the language. >> >> Hi Florian, >> >> The documentation for LLVM is intended to describe the state of the >> system without a historical view. To get the historical view we >> put major changes in the release notes. These haven't been written >> yet for 2.7 though. >> >> -Chris >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >
So I gather this means that malloc was removed from the IR because there are platforms that don't have non-stack allocation semantics? Garrison On Dec 7, 2009, at 12:21, Chris Lattner wrote:> > On Dec 7, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Garrison Venn wrote: > >> Ouch! Didn't see that. So at the risk of irritating those still in the process of baking 2.7, what is the sanction way of doing heap allocation going forward? :-) > > No, we only support stack allocation in LLVM IR now. :-) > > You can call out to normal malloc and free, just like any external function. > > -Chris > >> >> Garrison >> >> On Dec 7, 2009, at 11:18, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >>> >>> On Dec 7, 2009, at 2:13 AM, Florian Merz wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> I noticed that MallocInst and FreeInst have been removed from the LLVM IR as >>>> well as the language reference[1]. May I propose that at least some >>>> placeholder is left in that document telling the reader that these >>>> instructions have been removed. This should be kept in at least until there is >>>> one official release that does not support these instructions anymore. >>>> The same goes for the addition of the indirect branch instruction. A note in >>>> the language reference would be nice telling the reader when this instruction >>>> has been added to the language. >>> >>> Hi Florian, >>> >>> The documentation for LLVM is intended to describe the state of the system without a historical view. To get the historical view we put major changes in the release notes. These haven't been written yet for 2.7 though. >>> >>> -Chris >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> LLVM Developers mailing list >>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >> >