Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "getsourcerang".
Did you mean:
getsourcerange
2019 Mar 04
3
RFC for f18+runtimes in LLVM
...y a complicated language and mixing all of Fortran's concerns (including a completely different object model) will make both of them *worse* than having them stand alone IMO.
Could there be a common base class for flang and clang AST nodes? That
is, an abstract class that has children()/dump()/getSourceRange()?
Michael
2018 May 25
1
MSP430: interrupt vector number out of bounds error in v6/trunk (with patch)
...a/SemaDeclAttr.cpp:5104
unsigned Num = NumParams.getLimitedValue(255);
if ((Num & 1) || Num > 30) {
S.Diag(AL.getLoc(), diag::err_attribute_argument_out_of_bounds)
<< AL.getName() << (int)NumParams.getSExtValue()
<< NumParamsExpr->getSourceRange();
return;
}
Also, the __isr_ symbol is emitted with the vector number divided by 2.
// Step 3: Emit ISR vector alias.
unsigned Num = attr->getNumber() / 2;
llvm::GlobalAlias::create(llvm::Function::ExternalLinkage,
"__isr_" + Tw...
2014 Dec 09
3
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev][Openmp-dev] Clang Plugin to analyze OpenMP AST
Hi,
I am writing a plugin to get information about the OpenMP constructs from the AST.
I am basically writing a “RecursiveASTVisitor” and I am trying to find the OpenMP statement and get information like filename and line of code.
When I am visiting recursively each statement I have my own switch on the “StmtClass” and for now I am focusing on “OMPParallelForDirectiveClass”.
In my understanding,
2018 Dec 31
4
RFC: Modernizing our use of auto
On Dec 16, 2018, at 11:44 AM, Stephen Kelly via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On 25/11/2018 14:43, Stephen Kelly via llvm-dev wrote:
>> However this is a proposal for more modern thinking regarding the permissiveness of auto in LLVM codebases.
>> Currently the rule on the use of auto is here:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the input on this topic,
2019 Mar 01
6
RFC for f18+runtimes in LLVM
On 01/03/2019 17:26, Troy Johnson via llvm-dev wrote:
> This RFC started a good discussion and I’d like to hear responses from its author
> to all of the points that have been made so far.
>
>
>
> FWIW, I’m also in favor of reusing as much from Clang as practical. In fact, with> the combined repo now, it might make sense to factor out some common front end code
> that