search for: getnext

...d Gabor.. I will use the iterator instead.. On 5/11/07, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru> wrote: > Hello, Ferad. > > > I switched to the upcoming version 2.0 branch and porting my code from > > 1.9. Thanks there is not a lot to do. I found that > > Instruction::getNext and Instruction::getPrev are private. Is this > > intentional? > Yes, incorrect usage of them caused hard-tracking bugs (e.g. calling > getNext() on terminator returns you the last "dummy" instruction in the > list, and so on). > > > If yes, what would you recomme...

Hi, I switched to the upcoming version 2.0 branch and porting my code from 1.9. Thanks there is not a lot to do. I found that Instruction::getNext and Instruction::getPrev are private. Is this intentional? If yes, what would you recommend instead using them? Thanks, Ferad

Hi Ferad! the change has been made with <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of- Mon-20070416/047931.html> You have to use iterators now and "operator ++" etc. Hope this helps, cheers, Gabor

...roblem with "DynaLoader.pm" seems to be an old one. The machine is Centos 5.2 i386 I'm trying to build instead of using the one available in the repos because I'll build in other platforms and also in nagios-plugins. Thanks Marcelo [1] Failed 17/17 tests, 0.00% okay t/getnext.....Can't load '/users/newt2/mgarcia/Downloads/Nagios-3.0.3/net-snmp-5.4.2/perl/SNMP/../blib/arch/auto/NetSNMP/default_store/default_store.so' for module NetSNMP::default_store: libnetsnmp.so.15: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i386-...

Dear All, Given a pointer to an instruction, what is the easiest way to insert one or more new instructions after that instructions? We used to find the next instruction using Instruction::getNext(), but this method seems to have been made private now. -- John T.

...e cause of failure? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- opt((anonymous namespace)::PrintStackTrace()+0x18)[0x8691968] opt((anonymous namespace)::SignalHandler(int)+0xd8)[0x8691bc8] /lib/tls/libc.so.6[0x688a48] opt(llvm::BasicBlock::getNext()+0x6)[0x83d36d0] opt(llvm::SymbolTableListTraits<llvm::BasicBlock, llvm::Function, llvm::Function, llvm::ilist_traits<llvm::BasicBlock> >::getNext(llvm::BasicBlock*)+0x11)[0x83d36c5] opt(llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::BasicBlock>::operator++()+0x17)[0x83d011d] opt(llvm::ilist_iterato...

...txt Here's an ARM test that cores: $ llvm-as < /home/emil/ll/llvm-2.1/test/CodeGen/ARM/2007-01-19-InfiniteLoop.ll | llc -march=arm -mattr=+v6,+vfp2 Segmentation fault (core dumped) $ gdb `which llc` llc.core [...] (gdb) where #0 0x0853d606 in llvm::ilist_traits<llvm::MachineInstr>::getNext ( N=0x5a5a5a5a) at MachineBasicBlock.h:37 #1 0x0854d807 in llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::MachineInstr>::operator-- ( this=0xbfbfe880) at ilist:137 #2 0x085502c5 in std::__advance<llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::MachineInstr>, int> (__i=@0xbfbfe880, __n=0) at stl_iterator_bas...

...-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > opt((anonymous namespace)::PrintStackTrace()+0x18)[0x8691968] > opt((anonymous namespace)::SignalHandler(int)+0xd8)[0x8691bc8] > /lib/tls/libc.so.6[0x688a48] > opt(llvm::BasicBlock::getNext()+0x6)[0x83d36d0] > opt(llvm::SymbolTableListTraits<llvm::BasicBlock, llvm::Function, llvm::Function, llvm::ilist_traits<llvm::BasicBlock> >::getNext(llvm::BasicBlock*)+0x11)[0x83d36c5] > opt(llvm::ilist_iterator<llvm::BasicBlock>::operator++()+0x17)[0x83d011d] > opt(llvm...

I get the following error when I try to run arm lli on QEMU: lli: llvm-arm/src/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/ilist.h:197: typename bidirectional_iterator<NodeTy, int>::reference llvm::ilist_iterator<NodeTy>::operator*() const [with NodeTy = llvm::RecyclerStruct]: Assertion `Traits::getNext(NodePtr) != 0 && "Dereferencing end()!"' failed. 0 lli 0x006abbfc Stack dump: 0. Program arguments: ./lli hello2.bc 1. Running pass 'ARM Instruction Selection' on function '@main' Aborted. Is it a bug or I am doing something stupid? Thanks hannibal...

>> Is attached patch acceptable? > > Looks great, applied, thanks! > http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20050131/023931.html Thanks! >> Also I have in Makefile.rules (but not include in patch) some >> modification for simplify used common Makefile.rules in LLVM projects and >> non-LLVM project (guarding some LLVM specific parts by ifdef

On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 06:41:38PM +1000, Emil Mikulic wrote: > The "make check" produced: > === Summary === > > # of expected passes 2209 > # of unexpected failures 41 > # of expected failures 5 > gmake[1]: *** [check-local] Error 1 > gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/emil/ll/objdir-llvm/test' > gmake: ***

...equires explicit arguments. * CastInst is now abstract and its functionality is split into several parts. What to choose when casting a pointer to a double pointer? Is it always clear which cast instruction is the right one (e.g. when exact Value is only known at run-time)? * Instruction::getNext()/Prev() have suddenly become private, seemingly without fast, easy to use alternative. Is iterating through the parent BasicBlock's iterator the only solution? * The same goes for BasicBlock::getNext()/Prev(). Is iterating through the parent Function's iterator the only solution?...

...-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > opt((anonymous namespace)::PrintStackTrace()+0x18)[0x8691968] > opt((anonymous namespace)::SignalHandler(int)+0xd8)[0x8691bc8] > /lib/tls/libc.so.6[0x688a48] > opt(llvm::BasicBlock::getNext()+0x6)[0x83d36d0] > opt(llvm::SymbolTableListTraits >::getNext(llvm::BasicBlock*)+0x11)[0x83d36c5] > opt(llvm::ilist_iterator::operator++()+0x17)[0x83d011d] > opt(llvm::ilist_iterator::operator++(int)+0x1c)[0x849c64e] > /home/tsharma/ankur/llvm/Debug/lib/LLVMHello.so((anonymous names...

...getelementptr ([42 x i8]* @.str1, i32 0, i32 0)) nounwind ; <i32> [#uses=0] opt: /home/heming/defens/llvm-2.5/include/llvm/ADT/ilist.h:173: llvm::ilist_iterator<NodeTy>& llvm::ilist_iterator<NodeTy>::operator--() [with NodeTy = llvm::Instruction]: Assertion `Traits::getNext(NodePtr) && "--'d off the beginning of an ilist!"' failed. 0 opt 0x08642be4 1 opt 0x08642f26 2 0xb7f7f420 __kernel_sigreturn + 0 3 libc.so.6 0xb7d0ca01 abort + 257 4 libc.so.6...

...; I get the following error when I try to run arm lli on QEMU: > > lli: llvm-arm/src/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/ilist.h:197: typename bidirectional_iterator<NodeTy, int>::reference llvm::ilist_iterator<NodeTy>::operator*() const [with NodeTy = llvm::RecyclerStruct]: Assertion `Traits::getNext(NodePtr) != 0 && "Dereferencing end()!"' failed. > 0 lli 0x006abbfc > Stack dump: > 0. Program arguments: ./lli hello2.bc > 1. Running pass 'ARM Instruction Selection' on function '@main' > Aborted. > > > Is it a bug or I am doing s...

...using getPrevNode on an instruction that is the only one in a BasicBlock. I was expecting getPrevNode to return 0 in that case (as per docs), but it breaks. I guess the code in in ilist_node.h: NodeTy *getPrevNode() { NodeTy *Prev = this->getPrev(); // Check for sentinel. if (!Prev->getNext()) return 0; return Prev; } would need to check if Prev is NULL before calling Prev->getNext(). BR Carlos

...i32* @myrand.z, align 4 22> %tmp1 = and i32 %tmp, 5535 23> %tmp2 = mul nsw i32 %tmp1, 36969 24> %tmp3 = ashr i32 %tmp, 16 And I have an Instruction *inst that is the instruction on line 22. then have the code: Use *operand1 = &(inst->getOperandUse(0)); I expect that operand1->getNext() will return the the Use* for %tmp in the instruction on line 24. However, what I get is a null pointer. Why is this exactly? I feel I'm not understanding the point of the Use if I can't even see the very next usage only 2 instructions away. So I must be missing something. Thank yo...

Hi, all. When I run the llvm using the inline option. I always got the following error message. So I cannot even use inline option. suna14|~/MP1|[37]% opt -inline < scalarize.llvm.bc > /dev/null ../../../include/Support/ilist:104: failed assertion `Traits::getNext(NodePtr) != 0 && "Dereferencing end()!"' Abort I didn't use my own pass. Please let me know if you also have this problem? or it's something wrong with my code? Thanks, xiaodong

> Given a pointer to an instruction, what is the easiest way to insert one > or more new instructions after that instructions? We used to find the > next instruction using Instruction::getNext(), but this method seems to > have been made private now. LLVM Builder is the easiest way to create/insert instructions. Or you turn the instruction pointer to an iterator and advance: http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html#iterate_convert -Tanya > > -- John T. > > ________...

Hello, Consider this : > setClass("track", representation(x="numeric", y="numeric")) [1] "track" > o <- new( "track", x = 1, y = 2 ) > for( i in o ){ + cat( "hello\n") + } Error: invalid type/length (S4/1) in vector allocation This happens at those lines of do_for: n = LENGTH(val); PROTECT_WITH_INDEX(v =