search for: joearms

...en two sequence points and uses it for something other than determining the value written. From: Csaba Raduly Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 3:44 AM To: Joe Armstrong Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Is this a bug in clang? Hi Joe On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Joe Armstrong <joearms at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Is this a bug in clang, or a bug in my thinking? > > /Joe Armstrong > > > > When I compile the following program I get different answers in clang and gcc. > > int printf(const char * format, ...); Nitpick: you shouldn't do t...

...something other than determining the value written. From: Csaba > Raduly > Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 3:44 AM > To: Joe Armstrong > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Is this a bug in clang? > Hi Joe > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Joe Armstrong <joearms at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Is this a bug in clang, or a bug in my thinking? >> >> /Joe Armstrong >> >> >> >> When I compile the following program I get different answers in clang and gcc. >> >> int printf(const char * fo...

Hello, Is this a bug in clang, or a bug in my thinking? /Joe Armstrong /* When I compile the following program I get different answers in clang and gcc. $ gcc bug2.c $ ./a.out j = 40 $ clang bug2.c $ ./a.out j = 41 I think the correct answer is 41. If my understanding of C is correct (which, or course, it might not be) the incremented value of i++ is first made available

I have a problem. I'm writing a C compiler in my favorite programming language (don't ask :-) I have made a .s file, which can be correctly assembled and run with lli. But when I optimize it I get no errors from the optimizer, but the resultant file is incorrect. Here's what happens: llvm-as test2_gen.s %% no errors test2_gen.s.bc is produced lli test2_gen.s.bc n=887459712

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:50 AM, John Regehr <regehr at cs.utah.edu> wrote: >> So... Are 40 and 41 the only legal behaviors or are there more? > > Since the program invokes undefined behavior, anything goes. > > The compiler is perfectly within its rights to send a rude email to your > department chair if you compile that code. > > John > Ummmm The problem is

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Csaba Raduly <rcsaba at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Joe Armstrong  wrote: >> >> It seems very strange to me that the ansi standard says "XXX is >> undefined" and that both clang and gcc >> can detect that something is undefined and that by default they >> compile the offending code without

I assumed that C floats are 32 bits and doubles 64 bits ... but This code int main(){ float f; double f1; f = 3.145; f1 = 3.145; return(0); } Compiles (via clang) to: ; ModuleID = 'test101.c' target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32-n8:16:32" target triple =

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:51 AM, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com> wrote: > On Apr 26, 2011, at 2:07 AM, Joe Armstrong wrote: >> Compiles (via clang) to: >> >>  ; ModuleID = 'test101.c' >>  target datalayout = >>