search for: createarraytype

...bug info from FE to llvm code generator. Indeed, I liked the way it's hidden in DIBuilder. Also the way typerefs are dealt with, too, is very good. Would be good to split CreateLocalVariable into CreateArgValue and CreateAutoVariable. Also would be good to have a simpler array types creation (CreateArrayType(size, align, ty, num_elms)). cheers, --renato

Hi - attached is a patch to enable building DragonEgg (x86_64) for LLVM3.3 and LLVM3.4. That is, add these changes to the 3.3 release, and it becomes possible to build DragonEgg against a llvm3.4 compiler. Regards, Richard Gorton Cognitive Electronics rcgorton at cog-e.com ---------- -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name:

On Feb 25, 2011, at 5:23 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 24 February 2011 21:34, Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > > It simplified a bit type construction but the overall code did not > reduce that much. The old interface expected FEs to keep track of everything, where as new

On Feb 25, 2011, at 9:02 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > Would be good to split CreateLocalVariable into CreateArgValue and > CreateAutoVariable. Also would be good to have a simpler array types > creation (CreateArrayType(size, align, ty, num_elms)). That'd be straight forward to do. Patches welcome! - Devang

...onegg to gcc 4.6, which is a good news. And I am also trying to do that. The attachment get src/Convert.cpp to compile against gcc-4.6. Now I get a error while compiling dragonegg, --- Compiling Debug.cpp /tmp/chenwj/dragonegg/src/Debug.cpp: In member function 'llvm::DIType llvm::DebugInfo::createArrayType(tree_node*)': /tmp/chenwj/dragonegg/src/Debug.cpp:623: error: 'TYPE_DEBUG_REPRESENTATION_TYPE' was not declared in this scope --- According to the gcc-4.6.0/gcc/ChangeLog-2010, TYPE_DEBUG_REPRESENTATION_TYPE had been removed. I am still trying to solve this. Regards, chenwj -- Wei...

On 24 February 2011 21:34, Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: It simplified a bit type construction but the overall code did not reduce that much. It's still very similar to the previous style but had a few differences in the IR output. We had LIT tests that checked the IR and Dwarf and GDB