search for: myunionptr

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "myunionptr".

2010 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] - Union types, attempt 2
...extracted. But if you want to make it a bit less syntactically noisy, and also allow the same flexibility that getelementptr would allow in accessing a single member through a pointer, you could allow ; Load/store of one particular union field store i32 %myValue, union {i32, float}* %myUnionPtr %fieldValue = load union {i32, float}* %myUnionPtr as i32 ; %fieldValue == %myValue Where I've added a preposition 'as' to the load instruction by analogy with what the cast operators do with 'to'. I don't know that I'd argue the point much, but offhand it &...
2010 Jan 16
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] - Union types, attempt 2
...to make it a bit > less syntactically noisy, and also allow the same flexibility that > getelementptr would allow in accessing a single member through a > pointer, you could allow > > ; Load/store of one particular union field > store i32 %myValue, union {i32, float}* %myUnionPtr > %fieldValue = load union {i32, float}* %myUnionPtr as i32 > ; %fieldValue == %myValue > > Where I've added a preposition 'as' to the load instruction by analogy > with what the cast operators do with 'to'. > > I don't know that I'd argu...
2010 Jan 15
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] - Union types, attempt 2
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:41 AM, Joachim Durchholz <jo at durchholz.org>wrote: > Talin schrieb: > > Well, the fact that union members have to be indexed by number means that >> the ordering has to be part of the type - so even though type-theoretically >> union { i32, float } is the same as union { float, i32 }, in my >> implementation they are distinct types.
2010 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] - Union types, attempt 2
Talin schrieb: > Well, the fact that union members have to be indexed by number means > that the ordering has to be part of the type - so even though > type-theoretically union { i32, float } is the same as union { float, > i32 }, in my implementation they are distinct types. However, from the > standpoint of a frontend, this is not a great concern, because the > frontend