search for: douts

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 105 matches for "douts".

Did you mean: outs
2009 Aug 04
2
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
On Tuesday 04 August 2009 10:46, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:29 AM, Aaron Gray wrote: > > How do output hex in DOUT's ? > > Please don't use DOUT, please use: > > DEBUG(errs() << stuff); > > instead. I've got some more DOUT-involving patches in the queue. Is this a general design choice that's been made? If so I can change the
2009 Aug 04
3
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
On Tuesday 04 August 2009 18:24, Chris Lattner wrote: > The big issue is things like this: > > DOUT << foo.getName() << "\n"; > > When -debug is disable and even when assertions are turned off, > foo.getName() is still called. When you use: Yep, that's a problem. > DEBUG(errs() << foo.getName() << "\n"); > > When
2009 Aug 04
3
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
How do output hex in DOUT's ? Thanks, Aaron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090804/5dbbd4f7/attachment.html>
2009 Aug 04
0
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:29 AM, Aaron Gray wrote: > How do output hex in DOUT's ? Please don't use DOUT, please use: DEBUG(errs() << stuff); instead. -Chris -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090804/cda5fe94/attachment.html>
2009 Aug 04
2
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
On Tuesday 04 August 2009 17:52, Chris Lattner wrote: > I'd prefer for it to be eliminated, but it is currently used widely. > If your patches don't make it substantially worse, I won't have a > problem with them. Bonus points for removing DOUTs though :) Ok, this is good to know. With some of these patches I will have opportunities to remove DOUTS. What's the rationale for getting rid of it? -Dave
2009 Aug 04
2
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
>>How do output hex in DOUT's ? >Please don't use DOUT, please use: > > DEBUG(errs() << stuff); > >instead. Okay, I will modify my code. But how do I do hexadecimal output ? Aaron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090804/6614cf39/attachment.html>
2009 Aug 04
0
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
...choice should be documented > and DOUT should be marked deprecated if indeed that's the case. I'd prefer for it to be eliminated, but it is currently used widely. If your patches don't make it substantially worse, I won't have a problem with them. Bonus points for removing DOUTs though :) -Chris
2007 Sep 24
4
[LLVMdev] Compilation Failure
On Sep 24, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2007, at 3:07 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > >> A debug or release build? >> >> -bw > > Both, actually. Weird. I see a potential problem, though. The code is like this: void dumpToDOUT(SparseBitVector<> *bitmap) { dump(*bitmap, DOUT); } where dump expects an llvm::OStream& for the
2009 Dec 11
0
[LLVMdev] Old DOUT
On Dec 11, 2009, at 9:03 AM, David Greene wrote: >> >> If you're asking if a new dbgs() might be useful, "yes if specified well". >> If you're asking if you can convert everything to using it, "no". > > I'm not sure what you mean here. It's not ok to convert code under DEBUG() or > #ifndef NDEBUG to use dbgs()? Right. > Then
2009 Aug 04
0
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
...Greene wrote: > On Tuesday 04 August 2009 17:52, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> I'd prefer for it to be eliminated, but it is currently used widely. >> If your patches don't make it substantially worse, I won't have a >> problem with them. Bonus points for removing DOUTs though :) > > Ok, this is good to know. With some of these patches I will have > opportunities to remove DOUTS. Nice! Thanks, > What's the rationale for getting rid of it? The big issue is things like this: DOUT << foo.getName() << "\n"; When -debug is...
2009 Dec 10
3
[LLVMdev] Old DOUT
What replaced the old DOUT? I'm working on sending debug code upstream and one of the things I want to add is circular buffering for debug output. This is a real help when processing large files. So I need a stream that can act differently than errs(). Should I just create one? -Dave
2009 Aug 04
0
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
On Aug 4, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: > >>How do output hex in DOUT's ? > > >Please don't use DOUT, please use: > > > > DEBUG(errs() << stuff); > > > >instead. > > Okay, I will modify my code. But how do I do hexadecimal output ? > raw_ostream has a write_hex method. O << "foo: "; O.write_hex(42); ...
2009 Dec 11
2
[LLVMdev] Old DOUT
On Thursday 10 December 2009 17:53, Chris Lattner wrote: > > So I would write the above as: > > > > DEBUG(dbgs() << foo); > > > > Does that sound reasonable? > > If you're asking if a new dbgs() might be useful, "yes if specified well". > If you're asking if you can convert everything to using it, "no". I'm not sure
2009 Dec 11
4
[LLVMdev] Old DOUT
On Friday 11 December 2009 11:35, Chris Lattner wrote: = > > I'm not sure what you mean here. It's not ok to convert code under > > DEBUG() or #ifndef NDEBUG to use dbgs()? > > Right. > > > Then what's the point of providing it? > > I don't know what dbgs does, so I don't know! dbgs() will be a circular-buffering raw_ostream, meaning it saves
2009 Dec 10
0
[LLVMdev] Old DOUT
Hello, David > What replaced the old DOUT? DEBUG(errs() << foo); The reason is quite simple - DOUT in release mode was just /dev/null, but the functions sending data to it were still called. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.
2009 Dec 10
2
[LLVMdev] Old DOUT
On Thursday 10 December 2009 16:30, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Hello, David > > > What replaced the old DOUT? > > DEBUG(errs() << foo); > > The reason is quite simple - DOUT in release mode was just /dev/null, > but the functions sending data to it were still called. errs() is no good. I would want to keep errs() printing things out immediately. I need
2009 Aug 05
0
[LLVMdev] Outputting hex in DOUT's
2009/8/5 David Greene <dag at cray.com> > On Tuesday 04 August 2009 18:24, Chris Lattner wrote: > > > The big issue is things like this: > > > > DOUT << foo.getName() << "\n"; > > > > When -debug is disable and even when assertions are turned off, > > foo.getName() is still called. When you use: > > Yep, that's a
2009 Dec 12
0
[LLVMdev] Old DOUT
On Dec 11, 2009, at 9:44 AM, David Greene wrote: > On Friday 11 December 2009 11:35, Chris Lattner wrote: > = >>> I'm not sure what you mean here. It's not ok to convert code under >>> DEBUG() or #ifndef NDEBUG to use dbgs()? >> >> Right. >> >>> Then what's the point of providing it? >> >> I don't know what dbgs
2009 Jun 18
0
[LLVMdev] Initialising global Array
Andreas Neustifter wrote: > Hi, > > I try to create a array that has a nonzero initialiser: > > What i do is, first create the array type. > > > const ArrayType *ATy = ArrayType::get(Type::Int32Ty, NumEdges); > > Then create some constant values for the initializer. > > > std::vector<Constant*> Initializer; Initializer.reserve(NumEdges); > >
2009 Dec 10
0
[LLVMdev] Old DOUT
On Dec 10, 2009, at 1:46 PM, David Greene wrote: > On Thursday 10 December 2009 16:30, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >> Hello, David >> >>> What replaced the old DOUT? >> >> DEBUG(errs() << foo); >> >> The reason is quite simple - DOUT in release mode was just /dev/null, >> but the functions sending data to it were still called. >