Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "at19".
Did you mean:
a19
2011 Aug 11
1
[LLVMdev] nsw/nuw for trunc
On Aug 11, 2011, at19:34, John McCall wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2011, at 7:31 AM, Florian Merz wrote:
> > If we had nsw and nuw flags for truncations we'd know when to check for
> > this kind of overflow and when not. The compiler likely doesn't need
> > these flags and can still ignore them, for...
2011 Aug 11
0
[LLVMdev] nsw/nuw for trunc
On Aug 11, 2011, at 7:31 AM, Florian Merz wrote:
> If we had nsw and nuw flags for truncations we'd know when to check for this
> kind of overflow and when not. The compiler likely doesn't need these flags and
> can still ignore them, for us they would be useful.
Duncan's point is that this is totally different from the semantics of
nsw/nuw on other instructions, which
2011 Aug 11
3
[LLVMdev] nsw/nuw for trunc
Hi Duncan,
Am Thursday, 11. August 2011, 15:56:22 schrieb Duncan Sands:
> Hi Florian,
>
> > we'd like to be able to check for loss of information in trunc operations
> > in our LLVM-based bounded model checker [1]. For this it is important if
> > the trunc was on a signed or unsigned integer, so we need nsw and nuw
> > flags for this. Would you accept a patch