Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "getnextuse".
2009 Oct 11
3
[LLVMdev] Some additions to the C bindings
...lly have one. Has this changed?
No idea. It would be more C like to return null. The C
implementation of the function can check and return null if not set.
> I was following the pattern of Functions, Globals, etc., where you get
> a Use* (not a use_iterator), and then pass it back to a GetNextUse
> call, which turns it back into an iterator and advances it.
Conceptually you're returning an iterator. It happens to be
implemented as a tight wrapper around the Use.
>
> So you want the whole patch, or just the pieces you highlighted?
Please resend an updated patch (the whole t...
2009 Oct 11
3
[LLVMdev] Some additions to the C bindings
On Oct 6, 2009, at 5:47 PM, Kenneth Uildriks wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Kenneth Uildriks
> <kennethuil at gmail.com> wrote:
>> My front-end is sync'd with the trunk now, and working well, but it
>> required some additional functions exposed in the C bindings. I
>> hereby submit them for review and approval for inclusion in the
>> trunk.
2009 Oct 11
0
[LLVMdev] Some additions to the C bindings
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
> Isn't LLVMHasInitializer just  LLVMGetInitializer(x) != 0?
Last time I tried that, LLVMGetInitializer threw an assertion when the
global variable didn't actually have one. Has this changed?