search for: increment_operator

Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "increment_operator".

2004 May 05
0
[LLVMdev] Testing LLVM on OS X
...t.sequence_stack'. Dest=' %struct.sequence_stack' WARNING: Type conflict between types named 'struct.function'. Src=' %struct.function'. Dest=' %struct.function' WARNING: Found global types that are not compatible: %struct.rtx_def* (%struct.increment_operator*, %union.tree_node*)* %bc_expand_increment void (%struct.increment_operator*, %union.tree_node*)* %bc_expand_increment WARNING: Found global types that are not compatible: int (...)* %bc_xstrdup sbyte* (sbyte*)* %bc_xstrdup WARNING: Found global types that are not co...
2004 May 04
6
[LLVMdev] Testing LLVM on OS X
On Tue, 4 May 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > I suspect that a large reason that LLVM does worst than a native C > compiler with the CBE+GCC is that LLVM generates very low-level C code, > and I'm not convinced that GCC is doing a very good job (ie, without > syntactic loops). Yup, this is EXACTLY what is going on. I took this very simple C function: int Array[1000]; void test(int
2004 May 05
2
[LLVMdev] Testing LLVM on OS X
...Dest=' %struct.sequence_stack' > WARNING: Type conflict between types named 'struct.function'. > Src=' %struct.function'. > Dest=' %struct.function' > WARNING: Found global types that are not compatible: > %struct.rtx_def* (%struct.increment_operator*, > %union.tree_node*)* %bc_expand_increment > void (%struct.increment_operator*, %union.tree_node*)* > %bc_expand_increment > WARNING: Found global types that are not compatible: > int (...)* %bc_xstrdup > sbyte* (sbyte*)* %bc_xstrdup > WARNING: F...