search for: fishier

...is just the > thing. I see. Then I agree. > > It looks to me that the compiler just got a bit more picky and your > original assumption was wrong to begin with. > However, he also stated that in the case the functions returns void it is not removed, which suggest there is something fishier going on. > > Maybe your project needs to tell the middle-end (via function > attributes) that the function does have side effects? > > cheers, > --renato > -- *Alexandre Isoard* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lis...

...in via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 24 August 2016 at 11:45, Alexandre Isoard <alexandre.isoard at gmail.com> > wrote: > > However, he also stated that in the case the functions returns void it is > > not removed, which suggest there is something fishier going on. > > Looking back at the example (and LangRef, for function attributes), > looks like it's not legal to remove because the function does *not* > have "readnone" or "readonly", so LLVM can't prove it side-effect > free. > > Sanjoy's fix i...

...le the situation even if it has to resort to creating a temporary directory manually without using a library function. > > >> The only thing I can think is it is my instillation proceedure but I > >> cannot find anything wrong with it. > > > >There's something fishier than just your inst >>>A<<< ll :) procedure at > >work here. > > Yes, there does seem to be something odd. Quite unsettling after the amount > of work we have put in to it. Thought we had it sussed. I do find Cygwin a > bit brittle at times. Yup. I don't...

I chose rsync over diff -r because diff -r is a binary comparison and it takes longer than creating a checksum. Isn't that correct? I did not understand this: > Rsync isn't even smart enough to not bother checksumming things that don't even have a comparison file. --checksum seems to work as you say even in --dry-run mode. At least it takes a lot of time, which should be a good

I am probably stating the obvious, but if the function is side-effect free (onlyReadsMemory) it is valid to remove it. But I am guessing that does not belong to this pass. On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Sanjoy Das via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Btw, looks like the bug is in runSCCP in > > for (BasicBlock::iterator BI = BB.begin(), E = BB.end(); BI !=

I did not report this first error earlier as I thought it trivial. Basically it looks like something odd is happening with the configuration and 'include/llvm/config/config.h' Getting this error on building the tools on a fresh Cygwin install and update :- $ make tools-only make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/build/llvm/lib/System' llvm[1]: Compiling Path.cpp for Debug build In file