Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "c4291".
Did you mean:
4291
2008 May 21
3
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
...ild without errors. I didn't have time to test
the clang build, but at least this patch will make things compile so someone else can test it.
m.
PS. Visual Studio really hates how the operator new is overridden in User.h:42, you get thousands upon thousands of
warnings of the form:
warning C4291: 'void *llvm::User::operator new(size_t,size_t)' : no matching operator delete found; memory will not be
freed if initialization throws an exception
There's also quite a few other things you get warnings about, mixed use of struct/class for the same thing and
conversions from 64 bit...
2008 Jun 11
0
[LLVMdev] some warning from VS2005 (requested by gabor)
...int', possible loss
of data
..\..\lib\CodeGen\SelectionDAG\SelectionDAG.cpp(4450) : warning C4244:
'initializing' : conversion from 'uint64_t' to 'unsigned int', possible loss
of data
The missing delete operator:
f:\Prog\llvm\include\llvm/Instructions.h(2012) : warning C4291: 'void
*llvm::User::operator new(size_t,unsigned int)' : no matching operator
delete found; memory will not be freed if initialization throws an exception
f:\Prog\llvm\include\llvm/User.h(230) : see declaration of
'llvm::User::operator new'
f:\Prog\llvm\include\llvm/Instruct...
2008 May 21
0
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
...applying those 3 patches and let me know if it builds for you
and what version of MSVC you have?
Thanks,
Tanya
>
> m.
>
> PS. Visual Studio really hates how the operator new is overridden in
> User.h:42, you get thousands upon thousands of warnings of the form:
>
> warning C4291: 'void *llvm::User::operator new(size_t,size_t)' : no matching
> operator delete found; memory will not be freed if initialization throws an
> exception
>
> There's also quite a few other things you get warnings about, mixed use of
> struct/class for the same thing and...
2008 May 21
0
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
As I saw from the mailing list the MSVC 2005 patches were made to take into
account the new files from the development branch, files which are not in
the 2.3 release. So for now the below patch is the only one functional for
the release. If I am wrong, please someone correct me.
If someone can make a 2005 patch for the release branch, it is ok. Else, I
am afraid that this one is for now the
2008 May 20
3
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
> This is my patch for MSVC 2008 and it was applied by Chris:
>
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20080512/062390.html
>
> I tested it and it is ok for the 2.3 release.
I don't believe I can apply this patch. There have been several patches
applied recently to TOT to allow MSVC 2005 which I think many people are
using. Does this patch mean that one