search for: asembler

...gets created. I did not manage to make llvm-gcc create __main. > If you can create platform independent code from D, then you should > be able to just use the LLVM bytecode representation. D itself is platform independent, but since D is also aimed at system programming it has an inline asembler. However one can supply different kinds of assembler through conditional comilation, so the following would be completely valid: void foo(){ version(x86) { asm { /* x86 assembler */ } } else version(llvm) { asm { /* llvm assembler */ } } else { /* plai...

...works. It's long been commented out since we don't even support Mips I anymore. I avoided that in Mips 16 by writing some patterns that translate to something like: cmp rx, ry ; implicitly set T8 btnez foo: ; branch if T8 not zero mov ra, rb foo:.... There is a way to do this in Mips asembler without needing to really create a label. There are builtin forward and backward labels you can use for this and that's what I do in some cases and in other cases I think I just do a .+4 or something. SOmething like that. You can see the mips 16 patterns if you want to know the details but...

...ce we don't even support Mips I anymore. > > I avoided that in Mips 16 by writing some patterns that translate to something like: > > cmp rx, ry ; implicitly set T8 > btnez foo: ; branch if T8 not zero > mov ra, rb > foo:.... > > There is a way to do this in Mips asembler without needing to really create a label. There are builtin forward and backward labels you can use for this and that's what I do in some cases and in other cases I think I just do a .+4 or something. > > SOmething like that. You can see the mips 16 patterns if you want to know the detai...

...we don't even support Mips I anymore. > > I avoided that in Mips 16 by writing some patterns that translate to > something like: > > cmp rx, ry ; implicitly set T8 > btnez foo: ; branch if T8 not zero > mov ra, rb > foo:.... > > There is a way to do this in Mips asembler without needing to really > create a label. There are builtin forward and backward labels you can > use for this and that's what I do in some cases and in other cases I > think I just do a .+4 or something. > > SOmething like that. You can see the mips 16 patterns if you want to...

...e. >> >> I avoided that in Mips 16 by writing some patterns that translate to >> something like: >> >> cmp rx, ry ; implicitly set T8 >> btnez foo: ; branch if T8 not zero >> mov ra, rb >> foo:.... >> >> There is a way to do this in Mips asembler without needing to really >> create a label. There are builtin forward and backward labels you can >> use for this and that's what I do in some cases and in other cases I >> think I just do a .+4 or something. >> >> SOmething like that. You can see the mips 16 patt...

On 04/27/2010 06:54 PM, Swiss Guy wrote: > > Thanks for your really fast answer. > > I understood that, but this means that the llvm+Clang suite is not able to > create a machine binary file without any intervention of GCC ? > > I thought it could. > > This means too that I must port GCC+Binutils in order to have a LLVM port > for my architecture ? > > That

Hi Wolfgang, On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 19:47 +0100, Wolfgang Draxinger wrote: > A few days ago Craig Black made the suggestion in the D newsgroup, > that someone creates a D <http://www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html> > frontend for LLVM. Never having heard of LLVM in the past, I > immediately got captured by its design when I've read the > documentation. I was always

A few days ago Craig Black made the suggestion in the D newsgroup, that someone creates a D <http://www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html> frontend for LLVM. Never having heard of LLVM in the past, I immediately got captured by its design when I've read the documentation. I was always scared by GCC - a great piece of software, but horribly bad documented, and in it's own way not very

Thanks for your really fast answer. I understood that, but this means that the llvm+Clang suite is not able to create a machine binary file without any intervention of GCC ? I thought it could. This means too that I must port GCC+Binutils in order to have a LLVM port for my architecture ? That sound like a huge work, I've chosen LLVM at the beginnig because I thought it could avoid me

    Thank you Kevin!!!    If I use fptrunc and bitcast realise NEON vcvtt ( I can sure, "fptrunc  double %tmp to float" is right, but "fptrunc float %tmp to half" is wrong). My target platform is MIPS.  The command as following: NEON:            vcvtt.f16.f32 s2, s0 llvm Code: %Vt_2 = load float* %VFP_s0, align 4 %Vt3_1 = fptrunc float %Vt_2 to half %Vt4_1 = bitcast half

Hello - What I want to do seems very simple - I want to make sure any H.323 traffic gets processed before anything else entering or leaving this network. The network has a videoconferencing device on the LAN at 192.168.16.4. A Linux firewall NATs an external IP Address to this internal address and I have appropriate SNAT and DNAT rules that work. The NAT and connection tracking rules all work