search for: bbitre

...l.com> wrote: > Cameron, > > To make it less vague, I would ideally like to traverse top down. I > believe what you suggested is what I want, I will have a look at it. > > Currently, I am iterating over the BBs in a Function, so > Function::iterator BBitr=F->begin(), BBitrE=F->end(); > BBitr!=BBitrE;++BBitr, does that help clarify what I'm looking for? With > this current iteration method, I seem to sometimes get top down but other > times get bottom up and sometimes it starts top down then jumps to the > bottom and goes bottom up. Is there a reason...

...ameron, >> >> To make it less vague, I would ideally like to traverse top down. I >> believe what you suggested is what I want, I will have a look at it. >> >> Currently, I am iterating over the BBs in a Function, so >> Function::iterator BBitr=F->begin(), BBitrE=F->end(); >> BBitr!=BBitrE;++BBitr, does that help clarify what I'm looking for? With >> this current iteration method, I seem to sometimes get top down but other >> times get bottom up and sometimes it starts top down then jumps to the >> bottom and goes bottom up. I...

LLVMers, Is there any way to guarantee iteration of the basic blocks from top down or path to path? Currently it looks sort of semi-random, sometimes visiting loop heads first and other times loop tails, is there a way I can visit the BBs top down or path to path? Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

...t; Cameron, > > > > To make it less vague, I would ideally like to traverse top down. I > believe what you suggested is what I want, I will have a look at it. > > > > Currently, I am iterating over the BBs in a Function, so > Function::iterator BBitr=F->begin(), BBitrE=F->end(); > BBitr!=BBitrE;++BBitr, does that help clarify what I'm looking for? With > this current iteration method, I seem to sometimes get top down but other > times get bottom up and sometimes it starts top down then jumps to the > bottom and goes bottom up. Is there a reason...

I'm building a SCCPass below, it appears that the CallGraphNode->getFunction returns a valid function but seg faults on call like "getName" or "size" but not on calls like "empty" (which returns false). My understanding is that the heirarchy is: CallGraphSCC->CallGraphNode->Function->BasicBlock->Instruction, is this not the case? virtual bool