Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "c4361726".
Did you mean:
0.361726
2016 May 26
1
Potential ambiguity in the grammar of LLVM IR assembly
...obal i32 42
>
> Doesn't a global have to be named? The syntax in the IR reference
> doesn't make it optional:
>
> @<GlobalVarName> = [Linkage] [Visibility] [DLLStorageClass]
> [ThreadLocal] ...
That was changed quite recently:
http://reviews.llvm.org/rL269096#c4361726
I guess that means that the grammar is not ambiguous here anymore (if it
was before).
-Manuel
> Cheers.
>
> Tim.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/l...
2016 May 26
0
Potential ambiguity in the grammar of LLVM IR assembly
On 25 May 2016 at 16:10, Robin Eklind via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> declare void @foo() unnamed_addr
> global i32 42
Doesn't a global have to be named? The syntax in the IR reference
doesn't make it optional:
@<GlobalVarName> = [Linkage] [Visibility] [DLLStorageClass]
[ThreadLocal] ...
Cheers.
Tim.
2016 May 25
4
Potential ambiguity in the grammar of LLVM IR assembly
Hello everyone,
While developing a parser for LLVM IR, I seem to have stumbled upon a
potential ambiguity in the LLVM IR assembly language grammar. Most
likely there is something which I may have overlooked, so wanted to
reach out to a more experienced crowed for some feedback.
How would the following set of tokens be interpreted [1]?
declare
void
@foo()
unnamed_addr
global
i32
42
As far as