search for: copyable

...in "Kaleidoscope: Extending the Language: Mutable Variables" (http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/LangImpl7.html) and rely on mem2reg to promote these loads to registers. By the way, all registers are non-spillable. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Eliminate-PHI-for-non-copyable-registers-tp21953583p21972748.html Sent from the LLVM - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

On Feb 12, 2009, at 1:41 AM, [Alex] wrote: > They "should" be non-allocatable if the hardware implements the same > number > of these i32 registers as the "specification". The input language > (which is > converted to LLVM IR) may use up to 4 registers but the hardware > only has 2. > So they must be allocatable, right? To be allocatable, the code

...nother temporary register class? The values of these i32 regsiters can only be used as the index of another register class, but the value of the index itself cannot be read. Usually the program can be generated using only 2 of these i32 index registers, but the problem is LLVM requires them to be copyable if there is a PHI node. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Eliminate-PHI-for-non-copyable-registers-tp21953583p22040006.html Sent from the LLVM - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

On Feb 11, 2009, at 4:07 AM, Alex wrote: > In my hardware there are two special registers cannot be copied but > can only be assigned and referenced (read) in the other instruction. > They are allocatable also. > > br i1 %if_cond, label %then, label %else > then: > %x1 = fptosi float %y1 to i32 > br label %endif > else: > %x2 = fptosi float %y2 to i32 >

hi all, bug 18097 has already been discussed on this list more than a year ago, and it is open with a patch attached since last autumn ... despite being tagged as release blocker. is there any estimation when this issue will be fixed? tia, tim

In my hardware there are two special registers cannot be copied but can only be assigned and referenced (read) in the other instruction. They are allocatable also. br i1 %if_cond, label %then, label %else then: %x1 = fptosi float %y1 to i32 br label %endif else: %x2 = fptosi float %y2 to i32 br label %endif endif: %x3 = phi i32 [%x1, %then], [%x2, %else] PNE::LowerAtomiPHINode() fails

...ctly. This ends up with the A register being clobbered in the final listing by the store from %w06 to %w00. %w00 through %w1f form a register class (called dp16) of memory locations that while they are not really registers, can be used as such in a lot of situations. However, they are not directly copyable. They require a move to a hardware register and then a store to another dp16 register. Example: lda %w06 sta %w00 -or- ldx %w06 stx %w00 -or- ldy %w06 sty %w06 In short, the A, X, and Y registers are the only practical conduit through which one can copy dp16 "registers". One possibl...

That's an unintentional change. However, the reason for this change was to make optional of trivially copyable types trivially copyable, adding a user-provided move ctor would break that again :( I'm leaning towards making the non-trivial version of llvm::Optional more like std::optional. In the long term std::optional is going to replace llvm::Optional. How bad would that be for your use case? On Wed...

...const { > assert(hasVal); > - return *getPointer(); > + return reinterpret_cast<const T *>(storage.buffer); > } > - T &getValue() LLVM_LVALUE_FUNCTION { > - assert(hasVal); > - return *getPointer(); > +}; > + > +/// Storage for trivially copyable types only. > +template <typename T> struct OptionalStorage<T, true> { > + AlignedCharArrayUnion<T> storage; > + bool hasVal = false; > + > + OptionalStorage() = default; > + > + OptionalStorage(const T &y) : hasVal(true) { new (storage.buffer) T(y); &...

Hi plugin-authors. So this is a little bit of take two on this question, but why can''t I access a singleton on the model calling my plugin? The crux of the full plugin below is: #logger.info self.class.to_s new_copy = self.class.new( @copyable_attributes ) the logger spits out "Datatype", but I get an error from rails saying: undefined method `datatype'' for false:FalseClass for the self.class.new line. I also feel haunted by the knowledge that this is far easier than I think it is, though I cannot seem to find th...

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: > That's an unintentional change. However, the reason for this change > was to make optional of trivially copyable types trivially copyable, > adding a user-provided move ctor would break that again :( > > I'm leaning towards making the non-trivial version of llvm::Optional > more like std::optional. In the long term std::optional is going to > replace llvm::Optional. How bad would that be fo...

On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:58 PM, Talin wrote: > To handle the fact that types do not (and can not, at least as long as we intend to support obscure languages like "C" :) have linkage, the the linker uses a "best effort" approach. It attempts to merge types and rewrite IR to use the merged types where it can, but it doesn't make any guarantees. > > I want to add an

...be > > able to export/import a class such as clang::driver::Compilation? > > It looks like MSVC is trying to synthesize and export the copy assignment > operator and copy constructur. This is interesting, as I thought it wouldn't do > that if the class turns out not to be non-copyable. > > Does adding the following to the class (and similarly for others that are > failing) work? > > Compilation& operator=(Compilation&) = delete; > Compilation(Compilation&) = delete Good timing. This is the conclusion and solution to which I came too. I have t...

...r or T. The situation before was not that ErrorOr was std::error_code or T. I don't follow that second point. As I see it, TypedErrorOr<T> and ErrorOr<T> are identical except for two points: TypedError replaces std::error_code, and as a consequence TypedErrorOr is only movable, not copyable. Cheers, Lang. On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:40 AM, Paweł Bylica <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:36 PM Rafael Espíndola <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > wrote: > >> > I like this idea in general. It's a better implementation of what &gt...

...be > > able to export/import a class such as clang::driver::Compilation? > > It looks like MSVC is trying to synthesize and export the copy assignment > operator and copy constructur. This is interesting, as I thought it wouldn't do > that if the class turns out not to be non-copyable. > > Does adding the following to the class (and similarly for others that are > failing) work? > > Compilation& operator=(Compilation&) = delete; > Compilation(Compilation&) = delete Good timing. This is the conclusion and solution to which I came too. I have tri...

I'm trying to make a string set that has a flag to become the universal set, and figured StringSet might be a good starting point struct Selection : StringSet<> { bool all; Selection(const Selection &selection) : StringSet<>(selection), all(selection.all) {} Selection(bool all) : all(all) {} size_t count(const string &s) const { if (all) return

Ok, I have just found the cause of the error messages I am getting, and it now makes sense to me why the 'normal' build works fine on Windows, Linux and OS X, and why my personal build works on Linux and OS X, but not on Windows. However, I still don't understand why I am getting the error messages I am getting. Anyway, it has to do with wanting to export some classes and function,

...e, the whole idea behind AD is centralisation, all your users and groups exist in AD and your workstations, services etc look there to find them. You will have problems trying to keep your users etc in sync between two databases, take passwords for instance, in ldap they are easily visible and copyable, whilst in AD, they are hidden and read-only. I think that you need to think the other way i.e. how do I make my existing setup work with AD, instead of how do I make AD work with my existing setup. You will also have another problem, you will need to join your windows workstations to your new...

Hello all, At this moment we are still using Samba 3 for our Windows clients but we are in need for an Active directory. So the best solution for us looks like migrating to Samba 4 AD. But... we have a very robust OpenLDAP setup that we want to use for our default user administration and don't want to give this up. We really would like to syncing information from and to Samba LDAP but my

...ith push_back. If the API of the type went out of its way to make a constructor call explicit, I'd like to see the user code actually calling it. The consequence of this is very simple guidelines for programmers to: don't use emplace_back unless you *must* use it. So for containers of non-copyable and non-movable types, it can be very useful and important. But in every other case I would rather see push_back (and if an explicit constructor call is necessary, an explicit constructor call). My two cents. -Chandler -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:...