search for: n1124

Hi All , Was going through the C99 standard @ http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf which states that the Function declarators as direct-declarator ( parameter-type-list ) parameter-list: parameter-declaration parameter-list , parameter-declaration parameter-declaration: declaration-specifiers declarator declaration-specifie...

...e enclosing block] prior to the evaluation of E) modifying P to point to a copy of the array object into which it formerly pointed would change the value of E. Note that ‘‘based’’ is defined only for expressions with pointer types. This is from http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/ n1124.pdf Sec 6.7.3.1 para 3 >> Your example strikes me as contradictory to your description of Ada >> aliasing rules above. If A and B were in fact copies of an object >> then in your first example x would always be 0, no matter which order >> the reads and writes are performed....

...r translation unit. I'm > surprised that this code works on other platform. It must be a bug in > GCC, or maybe deliberately non-standard behavior. See 6.7.4 of the C99 > spec for details. I've read section 6.7.4 from here: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf My reading of that section suggests that the usage in FLAC is valid and correct. As for the addition of safe_malloc_mul_2op_ to file src/share/utf8/utf8.c, that simply should not be necessary. I suggest this is an error in the Visual Studio project files. Erik -- ---------------------------...

...the evaluation of E) modifying P to point to > a copy of the array object into which it formerly pointed would > change the value of E. > Note that ‘‘based’’ is defined only for expressions with pointer types. > > This is from http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/ > n1124.pdf Sec 6.7.3.1 para 3 suppose A and B are array pointers, and are in fact equal. Consider the code sequences (i) x = A[0] (a) B[0] = 1 (b) and (ii) B[0] = 1 (b) x = A[0] (a) If I understand right, (i)(b) is not based on A, either because it has no value (not sure what "the value of E&qu...

...aggregate or union type that includes one of the aforementioned > types among its > members (including, recursively, a member of a subaggregate or > contained union), or > — a character type. > (sec 6.5, items 6 and 7, page 67-68, > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf) LLVM does not have any such restrictions. > If LLVM IR is weaker than these C restrictions, then I have the > following questions about when GEP is undefined: In your examples, it is not GEP that would be undefined, but a load or store from the GEP. GEP just offsets the memory addres...

...type of the object, [...] — an aggregate or union type that includes one of the aforementioned types among its members (including, recursively, a member of a subaggregate or contained union), or — a character type. (sec 6.5, items 6 and 7, page 67-68, http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf) If LLVM IR is weaker than these C restrictions, then I have the following questions about when GEP is undefined: 1) Can I load a value partially or overlapped with other stored values? For example, if the stored values are of type [10*i32], and we cast i32* to {i8, i4, float} *, can we succ...

...that includes one of the aforementioned >> types among its >> members (including, recursively, a member of a subaggregate or >> contained union), or >> — a character type. >> (sec 6.5, items 6 and 7, page 67-68, >> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf) > > LLVM does not have any such restrictions. > >> If LLVM IR is weaker than these C restrictions, then I have the >> following questions about when GEP is undefined: > > In your examples, it is not GEP that would be undefined, but a load or > store from the GEP....

Hi, I have a confusion about types used in load/store, (http://llvm.org/docs/GetElementPtr.html#types) says that [...] Furthermore, loads and stores don't have to use the same types as the type of the underlying object. Types in this context serve only to specify memory size and alignment. Beyond that there are merely a hint to the optimizer indicating how the value will likely be used. [...]

...P to point to >> a copy of the array object into which it formerly pointed would >> change the value of E. >> Note that ‘‘based’’ is defined only for expressions with pointer >> types. >> >> This is from http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/ >> n1124.pdf Sec 6.7.3.1 para 3 > > suppose A and B are array pointers, and are in fact equal. Consider > the code sequences > > (i) > x = A[0] (a) > B[0] = 1 (b) > > and > > (ii) > B[0] = 1 (b) > x = A[0] (a) > > If I understand right, (i)(b) is not based on A,...

On Aug 21, 2007, at 6:12 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Christopher, > >> The benefits of a const * __restrict come from two different places. >> The const part is essentially enforced by the front-end and the >> restrict part is used to inform the alias analysis (it becomes a >> noalias parameter attribute). The noalias parameter attribute may be >> of use to

On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote: >> For representing scoping information, a relatively non-invasive >> approach is to introduce a special "copy" operation, which in LLVM >> might look like >> %a = copy %b >> This operation has to be somewhat special in that can't be folded away >> in most cases, but it can otherwise be pretty

Hi all, Second and hopefully final pre-release is here: http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/flac/beta/ I have personally tested this code on: x86-linux x86_64-linux powerpc-linux armhf-linux i386-freebsd9.1 i386-openbsd5.2 I also cross-compiled from Linux to 32 bit Windows and the compile ran to completion (the test suite requires a bunch of hacking before it can

On Mar 26, 2007, at 10:10 AM, Dan Gohman wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 02:14:56AM -0500, Christopher Lamb wrote: >> >> >> On Mar 25, 2007, at 5:22 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote: >>>> What about an approach not unlike how debugging information is >>>> handled? That >>>> is have