search for: autoinsert

It is quite tempting to start simple data entry sessions where you need to type in the data like this: my.frame<-data.frame(a=numeric(0),b=numeric(0)) fix(my.frame) (and if factors are involved, that is pretty much what you'd have to do in order to get the appropriate levels) However, in the X version, this seems to cause the data editor to freeze as soon as one hits Enter after

Hi, the llvm programmer's manual states in the symbol table paragraph: >The ValueSymbolTable class provides a symbol table that the >Function and Module classes use for naming value definitions and >call setName on a value, which will autoinsert it into the appropriate >symbol table So I conclude the following: -for Values, this intrinsic symbol table provides a function scope and any other scope may be achieved e.g. by some kind of "name mangling" -for Functions, it provides a Module scope, which may be extended by linking M...

Hi, all. When I run the llvm using the inline option. I always got the following error message. So I cannot even use inline option. suna14|~/MP1|[37]% opt -inline < scalarize.llvm.bc > /dev/null ../../../include/Support/ilist:104: failed assertion `Traits::getNext(NodePtr) != 0 && "Dereferencing end()!"' Abort I didn't use my own pass. Please let me know if you

I'm not opposed to mutable and its probably reasonable in this case. However, I'd defer to Chris' opinion for anything in VMCore. We try to limit the number of changes/additions there because the impact can be quite large if something goes wrong. Reid. On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 04:41, Vladimir Prus wrote: > Hi Reid, > > > Instructions are members of a linked list.

Hi Reid, > Instructions are members of a linked list. Consequently if you insert > some Instruction, that instruction gets changed. So, its not const. > > Simple enough? Yes, thank you. I started thinking if "mutable" is right here, but that's long philosophical issue ;-) - Volodya

The docs for the above-mentioned function say: This method may modify or replace the specified instruction, as long as it keeps the iterator pointing the the finished product. What does it mean to "keep an interator". Was "invalidates the iterator" intended, so something else. Another question, is how do I really replace the instruction. The operator= is private

...her Values and cleaned the whole thing up substantially. He even added docs to the Programmer's Manual for it. :) http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20040524/014614.html 14. Alkis added constructors for all of the LLVM instruction classes, allowing them to autoinsert at the end of a basic block. 15. LLVM is now much better at isolating all of the system-specific routines that it uses in its libsupport library. Code generator changes: 16. Brian added unique IDs to MachineBasicBlocks, making some clients simpler. 17. Brian eliminated the need for the L...

Hi, Thank Brian Gaeke so much. Following TraceBasicBlocks.cpp, I modified the code as below and could insert instruction or function I need into anywhere in Module. But it works well without BB->getInstList().push_back(InstrCall), and if I add the BB->getInstList().push_back() following new CallInst(), I got error information when runing opt. What is the reason for it? And is it necessary