Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "intrnisic".
Did you mean:
intrinsic
2004 Oct 24
2
[LLVMdev] Some question on LLVM design
...lt;MallocInst>(I)) {
Not true at all. Consider the "llvm/IntrinsicInst.h" header, which lets
us write stuff like this, today:
if (MemCpyInst *MCI = dyn_cast<MemCpyInst>(I))
MCI->getSource() MCI->getLength() ...
The one advantage that mallocinst has over using an intrnisic is that
instructions can have different return values in various parts of the
program (e.g., you can write 'malloc int' instead of '(int*)malloc(4)').
-Chris
--
http://llvm.org/
http://nondot.org/sabre/
2004 Oct 24
0
[LLVMdev] Some question on LLVM design
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:17:19AM -0500, Chris Lattner wrote:
> The one advantage that mallocinst has over using an intrnisic is that
> instructions can have different return values in various parts of the
> program (e.g., you can write 'malloc int' instead of
> '(int*)malloc(4)').
OK, then you could say that the *real* advantage of the malloc/alloca
instructions is that it can take a type as an...
2005 Dec 02
1
[LLVMdev] RFC: Plugable intrinsics
I can think of many people that use LLVM and maintain out of tree
extentions that will likely never be incorporated into mainline.
Maintaining out of tree intrnisics takes a fair amount of work and leads
to the choice of using a single version of LLVM for a project (and thus
have to manually incorporate bug fixes) or risk untimely breakage. I
propose that the plugin be extended to allow plugable intrinsics. To be
sucessful, such a plugin will have to provide...
2004 Oct 24
1
[LLVMdev] Some question on LLVM design
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Misha Brukman wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:17:19AM -0500, Chris Lattner wrote:
> > The one advantage that mallocinst has over using an intrnisic is that
> > instructions can have different return values in various parts of the
> > program (e.g., you can write 'malloc int' instead of
> > '(int*)malloc(4)').
> OK, then you could say that the *real* advantage of the malloc/alloca
> instructions is that i...
2004 Oct 23
0
[LLVMdev] Some question on LLVM design
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 03:18:00PM +0200, Marc Ordinas i Llopis wrote:
> I'm currently looking at LLVM as a possible back-end to a dynamic
> programming system (in the tradition of Smalltalk) we are developing.
Neat!
> I have read most of the llvmdev archives, and I'm aware that some
> things are 'planned' but not implemented yet. We are willing to
> contribute
2004 Oct 22
6
[LLVMdev] Some question on LLVM design
Hi everybody,
I'm currently looking at LLVM as a possible back-end to a dynamic
programming system (in the tradition of Smalltalk) we are developing. I
have read most of the llvmdev archives, and I'm aware that some things
are 'planned' but not implemented yet. We are willing to contribute the
code we'll need for our project, but before I can start coding I'll have
to