search for: erosa94taming

...rote: > Ok. Note that LLVM can represent irreducible loops. You can handle > this through code duplication. > -Chris If you are willing to invest more effort into a more complicated analysis, in many cases you can even avoid code duplication. See this paper for details: @inproceedings{erosa94taming, author = {Ana M. Erosa and Laurie J. Hendren}, title = {Taming Control Flow: A Structured Approach to Eliminating Goto Statements.}, booktitle = {ICCL}, year = {1994}, pages = {229--240}, } Cheers, -- Domagoj Babic http:/...

>> It has a section on "structural analysis" that you will find useful. >> >> Why do you want "for statements"? >> > > Thank you for this info, Chris. > I'm doing this 'cause I'm making a backend for a virtual machine > assembly has an instruction which is very similar to 'for' statement. > I know this seems quite

...n many cases you can even avoid code duplication. See this paper for > details: We implemented this in GCC early on in the days of GIMPLE, and while theoretically it removes code duplication, in practice it made the code take significantly more space and run slower. :) > > @inproceedings{erosa94taming, > author = {Ana M. Erosa and > Laurie J. Hendren}, > title = {Taming Control Flow: A Structured Approach to Eliminating > Goto Statements.}, > booktitle = {ICCL}, > year = {1994}, > pages = {229--240}, > } > > C...

---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 22:23:39 -0700 >From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> >Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] constructing 'for' statement from LLVM bitcode >To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > > >On Aug 24, 2007, at 10:07 PM, Seung Jae Lee wrote: > >> Do you have any idea on how I can construct