search for: isexactly

Oh, no. I should have been more clear. The patch was not rejected, just lost in the daily shuffle. I already have my employer's approval to send this upstream, so I will prepare a patch against trunk this morning. > I proposed a similar patch to LLVM (left circular shift) around 10/2011. > > Parts of my patch did make it into trunk about a year after, but others > > did not.

On Monday, July 30, 2012 12:16 AM, Cameron McInally wrote: > Hey Andy, > > I proposed a similar patch to LLVM (left circular shift) around 10/2011. > Parts of my patch did make it into trunk about a year after, but others > did not. > > At that time, my solution was to add a binary operator to the IRBuilder, > since LCS fits in nicely with the other shift operators. But,

Andy, Here is the left circular shift operator patch. I apologize to the reviewer in advance. The patch has a good bit of fine detail. Any comments/criticisms? Some caveats... 1) This is just the bare minimum needed to make the left circular shift operator work (e.g. no instruction combining). 2) I tried my best to select operator names in the existing style; please feel free to change them as

Hi Sanjay, Thanks, I saw this flag and it's definitely should be considered, but it appeared to me to be static characteristic of target platform. I'm not sure how appropriate it would be to change its value from a front-end. It says "Has", while optional flag would rather say "Uses" meaning that implementation cares about floating point exceptions. Regards, Sergey

Hi again, It's partially done. My concern is that it won't be accepted as is because of adding the flag parameter in a lot of places. I'd like to show what it looks like (here, not on llvm-commit yet), maybe someone could suggest a better way. There are two sources of the flag: field of TargetOptions and function attribute. I had to add the later one for InstCombine pass. Still

I'm noticing that since I originally submitted this patch, a new keyword has been added... isExact. Particularly in llvm/include/llvm/IRBuilder.h, on the lshr and ashr operators. I do not suppose that a circular shift can produce a poison value, but this is a little out of my domain. Would someone more familiar with poison values give me a bit of insight to them. Ty, Cameron On Tue, Jul 31,

Most certainly YES!!! Next to iptables tcp_wrappers is a solid seconde line of defense. The argument that is is no longer developped is rubbish. The package does what is should do, functionality isexactly what it should be and it is bug free. Also it is flexible enough to do other tricks with it like spawning something depending on the ip address the incoming connection is coming from. It is a great product thanks to Wietse Venemaand others who integrated it to e.g. ssh. Dont drop it please!!!!!!!!!...

Dear all, I have wrapped a C++ function in an R package. I allocate/deallocate memory using C++ 'new' and 'delete'. In order to allow user interrupts without memory leaks I've moved all the delete statements required after an interrupt to a separate C++ function freeMemory(), which is called using on.exit() just before the .C() call. I am concerned about the