Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "i_fdiv".
Did you mean:
m_fdiv
2015 Feb 19
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Minor typos corrected in docs
...r`` are guaranteed to have the same address as
the aliasee expression. ``unnamed_addr`` ones are only guaranteed to point
to the same content.
@@ -1779,7 +1779,7 @@
LLVM IR floating-point binary ops (:ref:`fadd <i_fadd>`,
:ref:`fsub <i_fsub>`, :ref:`fmul <i_fmul>`, :ref:`fdiv <i_fdiv>`,
-:ref:`frem <i_frem>`) have the following flags that can set to enable
+:ref:`frem <i_frem>`) have the following flags that can be set to enable
otherwise unsafe floating point operations
``nnan``
Index: docs/CodeGenerator.rst
=====================================================...
2009 Jun 16
0
[LLVMdev] Upcoming API change: FAdd, FSub, FMul
> The LLVM IR opcodes Add, Sub, and Mul have been each split into
> two. Add, Sub, and Mul now only handle integer types, and three
> new opcodes, FAdd, FSub, and FMul now handle floating-point types.
Dan,
Wondering the reason why there is no FDiv ?
Thanks,
Aaron
2009 Jun 15
5
[LLVMdev] Upcoming API change: FAdd, FSub, FMul
Hello,
The LLVM IR opcodes Add, Sub, and Mul have been each split into
two. Add, Sub, and Mul now only handle integer types, and three
new opcodes, FAdd, FSub, and FMul now handle floating-point types.
The main LLVM APIs are currently preserving backwards
compatibility, transparently mapping integer opcodes to
corresponding floating-point opcodes when the operands have
floating-point types.