search for: functiontypes

On 18/11/12 18:37, David Blaikie wrote: > Types, function or otherwise, have no in-memory representation. They > merely describe how bits should be interpreted. This is what I'm asking about the FunctionType. If I have a Pointer to a FunctionType it is clear how the bits should be interpreted, but what does the FunctionType it self say about the bits, if anything? In terms of use, can

Hi all. I would like to declare a function that takes a function pointer as an argument. In C, it would be : void execute(char (*func)(void*), void *param) So, in my compiler, I have : std::vector<const Type *> cbFPtrArgs(1, Type::getInt8PtrTy(C)); FunctionType * cbFPtrTy = FunctionType::get(Type::getInt8Ty(C), cbFPtrArgs, false); Function * func =

Hi, I' am trying to insert an InlineAsm Instruction in my pass, which FunctionType do I need for Inlineasm? If I understand it right, I need a call instruction to insert the new produced InlineAsm? Thanks for help, Michael for (BasicBlock::iterator bi = i->begin(), be = i->end(); bi != be; ++bi){ std::vector<const Type*> asm_arguments;

You need a pointer-to-function type, but FunctionType just gives you a function type. Use PointerType::getUnqual(FunctionType::get(...)). Or TypeBuilder<char (*func)(void*), false>::get(context) from Support/TypeBuilder.h. On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Salomon Brys <salomon.brys at gmail.com>wrote: > Hi all. > I would like to declare a function that takes a function pointer

Thank you Chris, for your hint, but I am still too stupid. I tried two versions asm_arguments.push_back(Type::VoidTy); FunctionType *asm_type = FunctionType::get(Type::VoidTy, asm_arguments, false); Alternatively FunctionType *asm_type = FunctionType::get(Type::VoidTy, std::vector<const Type*>(), false); . Can you give me a snippet of example code, or somebody else?

On Jul 31, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Michael Graumann wrote: > Hi, > I’ am trying to insert an InlineAsm Instruction in my pass, which > FunctionType do I need for Inlineasm? > If I understand it right, I need a call instruction to insert the > new produced InlineAsm? > > Thanks for help Inline asm works like a "callee". So for: call void asm sideeffect

This may sound weird, but what exactly is a FunctionType? That is, in terms of memory, or underlying value, what does the FunctionType actually represent. At first I though it might be a pointer, but it is not -- since you have to wrap a PointerType around it to use as such. Can a FunctionType value actually exist, or is strictly an abstract concept? In particular, can I actually directly define

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 6:40 AM, edA-qa mort-ora-y <eda-qa at disemia.com> wrote: > This may sound weird, but what exactly is a FunctionType? That is, in > terms of memory, or underlying value, what does the FunctionType > actually represent. At first I though it might be a pointer, but it is > not -- since you have to wrap a PointerType around it to use as such. > Can a

Hi, I'm trying to get my head around c++ - IR - c++ API and getting used tramform manual information to code. The manual states alloca is defined for <type>. FunstionType is a type, so alloca for functionType should be possible? Not? If we have a valid Module *m we can get an allocate instruction allocating space for a non-argumented function as follows: AllocaInst* pa2 = new

Hi, both versions are working: FunctionType *asm_Ftype = FunctionType::get(Type::VoidTy, std::vector<const Type*>(), false); InlineAsm* Iasm = InlineAsm::get(asm_Ftype,"isync","~{dirflag},~{fpsr},~{flags}",true); How can I insert this InlineAsm, because it is no instruction and this way it will not work: Instruction *pi = bi;

Hi all, I am having some problem using the Function class. For my application, FunctionType is not known at the time I initialize the function. So, I just initialize the Function as return type void with no arguments. As I work on my function, I get to know the arguments and I insert the arguments in ArgumentList data structure of the function. The FunctionType is defined as const and I can't

On Jul 31, 2009, at 5:04 PM, Michael Graumann wrote: > Thank you Chris, > for your hint, but I am still too stupid. I tried two versions > > asm_arguments.push_back(Type::VoidTy); > FunctionType *asm_type = FunctionType::get(Type::VoidTy, > asm_arguments, false); > > Alternatively > > FunctionType *asm_type = FunctionType::get(Type::VoidTy, >

> ... and it's in.  Please let me know if you see any problems. My clang self-hosted build (Release+Asserts on Release+Asserts, Linux x86_64) fails with: make[2]: Entering directory `/home/jay/llvm/objdir-self/tools/opt' llvm[2]: Compiling GraphPrinters.cpp for Debug+Asserts build clang: /home/jay/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Support/Casting.h:194: typename

This patch removes the deprecated form of FunctionType::get() which takes "const Type*"s for the argument types, and replaces just enough "const Type*" with "Type*" elsewhere to get everything building cleanly again. (My motivation for this was that I was getting ambiguous overload errors from some calls to FunctionType::get() in the Clang source.) Chris, are you

Hello, using the LLVM API, I've build one very simple function that adds two ConstantInts and returns the result. I noticed that, when I emit IR code, it is optimized to a simple "ret i16 42" when I add 40 and 2. I'd like to see the operations that are necessary to compute the result, though. Can I somehow disable this optimization in the pass, leading to more verbose IR code?

On Wednesday 12 November 2008 17:29, Chris Lattner wrote: > In fact, I strongly suspect that RefineAbstractType doesn't work if > you give it something that isn't Opaque. I'd recommend only using it > on Opaque, not random abstract types. Ok. > Sure, LLVM is more general than C. In LLVM, you can have a pointer > that points to itself, for example: > > %t =

Hi all, I am trying to extend a FunctionType to include new parameters. In particular, I want to ensure that the main function has been declared with both argsc and argsv. However there seems to be no easy way to accomplish this: llvm::Function::getFunctionType() returns a a reference to a const object, while modifying only the argument list yields an error during verification since the

Sure, go for it. FWIW, I was waiting to do this (eventually "const Type" will just be "Type" everywhere). I have a long list of cleanups that I want to land after the branch lands... but I was waiting for after the branch lands to make merging it less annoying and make things more incremental. Unfortunately I'm struggling to find time to finish things up and land the

I am trying to get a handle on IR builder, at least some basics. I ran through a tutorial here: Create a working compiler with the LLVM framework, Part 1 <http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-createcompilerllvm1/>, and it worked well enough. I have some simple code that creates a hello world IR. I am trying to now bring in some concepts from the Kaleidoscope tutorial, namely

Hi, I want to use a function defined in c(++)-code from code generated by llvm. For this I use ExecutionEngine.addGlobalMapping(). I started with the JIT execution engine and everything worked, then I switched to the interpreter engine and it stopped working, but only if compiled on a Linux system. More precisely it works if I use llvm 3.8.1 + gcc (Linux) + JIT llvm 3.8.0 + mingw-gcc