search for: __free

...e a primitive function with the same name for all archs (e.g. __alloc() ) and then people can include this function __alloc() in their libraries, inlining it or even renaming it just to fit the frontend needs. And this can be useful: every backend should implement this set of functions ( __alloc(), __free(), __write()… just for example) so the frontends can build a library with these functions as they want. I don't know if you get me. > On May 22, 2016, at 9:06 PM, Matthias Braun <matze at braunis.de> wrote: > > >> On May 22, 2016, at 10:31 AM, Lorenzo Laneve via llvm-dev...

...e a primitive function with the same name for all archs (e.g. __alloc() ) and then people can include this function __alloc() in their libraries, inlining it or even renaming it just to fit the frontend needs. And this can be useful: every backend should implement this set of functions ( __alloc(), __free(), __write()… just for example) so the frontends can build a library with these functions as they want. > I don't know if you get me. I think you will need to explain a bit more. We already have such a function, it’s called malloc() and a few LLVM passes assume specific behaviour about it....

...searchable. I.e., when a user creates a new Item, there is also a keywords field in the database that is a string like "purple triangle free" -- but all the user sees when they are creating the keywords is a series of checkboxes like: __blue __red __purple __circle __triangle __square __free __not-free And then the controller (?) would receive those checkbox values, concatenate them together, and stick them in the database. Doesn''t sound too terribly difficult. But... I can''t get it. I try using the check_box form helper, setting the variable to "item&quot...

...on with the same name for all archs (e.g. __alloc() ) and > then people can include this function __alloc() in their libraries, > inlining it or even renaming it just to fit the frontend needs. And this > can be useful: every backend should implement this set of functions ( > __alloc(), __free(), __write()… just for example) so the frontends can > build a library with these functions as they want. > > I don't know if you get me. > > I think you will need to explain a bit more. We already have such a > function, it’s called malloc() and a few LLVM passes assume spec...

> On May 22, 2016, at 10:31 AM, Lorenzo Laneve via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > My idea is an API where anyone can build a Runtime Library for any backend, including a set of functions people can inline/rename creating functions the frontend can include in the IR. > > For example implementing a cross-platform runtime function that allocates memory

My idea is an API where anyone can build a Runtime Library for any backend, including a set of functions people can inline/rename creating functions the frontend can include in the IR. For example implementing a cross-platform runtime function that allocates memory for a new object. (Obviously the library will have to be compiled for each target). I read about compiler-rt but I think it has

...e a primitive function with the same name for all archs (e.g. __alloc() ) and then people can include this function __alloc() in their libraries, inlining it or even renaming it just to fit the frontend needs. And this can be useful: every backend should implement this set of functions ( __alloc(), __free(), __write()… just for example) so the frontends can build a library with these functions as they want. >> > I don't know if you get me. >> >> I think you will need to explain a bit more. We already have such a function, it’s called malloc() and a few LLVM passes assume s...