Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "6f9a4a1f".
2013 Feb 20
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] NoBuiltin Attribute
...st one nobuiltin requirement
>
Can you give an example illustrating the con? I don't see how anything is pessimized with this approach.
-Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130220/6f9a4a1f/attachment.html>
2013 Feb 20
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC] NoBuiltin Attribute
On Feb 20, 2013 8:32 AM, "Krzysztof Parzyszek" <kparzysz at codeaurora.org>
wrote:
>
> On 2/20/2013 10:19 AM, David Blaikie wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'm still not understanding a few things in this thread, including one
>> here: if you annotate only the calls to print (say) then how do you
>> handle the indirect calls that the back end might yet
2013 Feb 20
3
[LLVMdev] [RFC] NoBuiltin Attribute
On 2/20/2013 10:19 AM, David Blaikie wrote:
>
> I'm still not understanding a few things in this thread, including one
> here: if you annotate only the calls to print (say) then how do you
> handle the indirect calls that the back end might yet optimize down to a
> constant & then attempt to simplify? Would all indirect calls be
> annotated with all the unsimplifiable