search for: ojeda

Hello, I am running a i7 MacBook Pro 2011. If I write: @g = global double 0.000000e+00 define i32 @main() { entry: %0 = load double* @g %1 = fmul double 1.000000e+06, %0 store double %1, double* @g ret i32 0 } in test.ll and I run > llc test.ll > gcc test.s I get: test.s:12:no such instruction: `vmovsd _g(%rip), %xmm0' test.s:13:no such instruction: `vmulsd LCPI0_0(%rip),

Hello, This is a little off-topic. But I am writing a compiler to llvm ir for a language that admits recursive nested functions and am stuck as to how to translate them. Concretely, I'm trying to lift them all to the topmost level and pass all their free variables explicitly as arguments. To do this, I have to determine all their free variables in their bodies. In particular when I come

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Nicolas Ojeda Bar <nojb at math.harvard.edu> wrote: > Hi Eli, > > I'm using 2.8. Ouch; too late to fix 2.8 :(. If you can, use trunk or the 2.9 branch instead. Otherwise, passing -mattr=-avx to llc should do the trick. -Eli > On Mar 18, 2011, at 6:50 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > >&g...

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Nicolas Ojeda Bar <nojb at math.harvard.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > Is this correct behaviour? > > test.ll: > > declare {} @__ex__print_int(i64) > > define i32 @main() { > entry: >  %0 = call i64 @f.1() >  %1 = call {} @__ex__print_int(i64 %0) >  ret i32 0 > } > >...

Hi, Compiling a simple function with the 3.0 SVN branch llc produces .s output containing cfi_startproc, cfi_endproc, cfi_def_cfa_offset that gcc refuses to compile (OS X 10.7 on X86-64) with the following error: test.s:6:Unknown pseudo-op: .cfi_startproc test.s:10:Unknown pseudo-op: .cfi_def_cfa_offset test.s:10:Rest of line ignored. 1st junk character valued 51 (3). test.s:38:Unknown

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Nicolas Ojeda Bar <nojb at math.harvard.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > When calling a function, does the llvm code generator support passing structured types (arrays, structs, etc.) by _value_? I wrote some small examples, and it seemed > to work, but I was wondering if anything can go wrong if the stru...

Dear list, I want to add SJLJ exception handling to my frontend. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any examples in the documentation as to how to use the intrinsics @llvm.eh.sjlj.setjmp @llvm.eh.sjlj.longjmp @llvm.eh.sjlj.lsda @llvm.eh.sjlj.callsite Is there a way to force Clang to use SJLJ exception handling for C++? That way I would be able to look at its output to learn how to use

I strongly advise you not to use SjLj exception handling. Use zero-cost-exceptions via DWARF instead. If you really want to pursue sjlj anyway, look at the ARM backend. It uses them for darwin targets. -Jim On Jul 12, 2013, at 9:09 AM, Nicolas Ojeda Bar <N.Ojeda.Bar at dpmms.cam.ac.uk> wrote: > Dear list, > > I want to add SJLJ exception handling to my frontend. Unfortunately, > there doesn't seem to be any examples in the documentation as to how > to use the intrinsics > > @llvm.eh.sjlj.setjmp > @llvm.eh.s...

...n( sum(data-x) );} return( f ) } d <- 1:10 g <- create.f(d) d <- NULL g(1) [1] 45 Does exist an easy way to solve the problem ? May be I've missed some easier implementation in R..? Thanks in advance. ######################################################################## Jorge Ojeda. Profesor Asociado. Dept. M?todos Estad?sticos. Universidad de Zaragoza. ######################################################################## -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.h...

Hi, When calling a function, does the llvm code generator support passing structured types (arrays, structs, etc.) by _value_? I wrote some small examples, and it seemed to work, but I was wondering if anything can go wrong if the structured types are very large... Thanks, N

Hi, Is this correct behaviour? test.ll: declare {} @__ex__print_int(i64) define i32 @main() { entry: %0 = call i64 @f.1() %1 = call {} @__ex__print_int(i64 %0) ret i32 0 } define internal fastcc i64 @f.1() { entry: ret i64 7 } > opt -std-compile-opts test.ll -S ; ModuleID = 'test.ll' define i32 @main() noreturn nounwind { entry: tail call void @llvm.trap()

When fitting model 'y~1', the 'lm' response is ok, but it is not possible to get predictions using 'predict'. May be this is a bug, at least i think it is somehow inconsistent. > rm(list=ls()) > d <- data.frame(x=runif(50),y=rnorm(50)) > plot(d) > d.lm <- lm(y~1,data=d) > d.lm Call: lm(formula = y ~ 1, data = d) Coefficients: (Intercept)

...= 10240 max xmit = 65535 dns proxy = No wins server = 192.168.10.10 ldap ssl = no create mask = 0775 hosts allow = 127., 192.168. cups options = raw socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192 IPTOS_LOWDELAY -- Isaac Ojeda Llebry Servicio de Inform?tica y Comunicaciones de la ULPGC e-mail: iojeda en becarios.ulpgc.es Tel?fono: +34 928 459568

Hi, Question 1: Will the new type system allow to incrementally build structs (instead of filling all the fields in one go, as in the example given in <http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/TypeSystemRewrite.txt>? Question 2: Will the ocaml bindings to be updated to work with the new type system once the merging of the rewrite to the main branch is done? Thanks very much, N

...FDE. But in this case, the compiler is trying to omit the LSDA by marking that the FDE has a zero sized augmentation data. I'll have to research if this is a valid dwarf unwind optimization. Even if it is, it is tripping up the existing linker. -Nick On Apr 10, 2011, at 6:06 AM, Nicolas Ojeda Bar wrote: > Hi, > > If I type > > define i32 @main() gc "shadow-stack" { > entry: > %0 = alloca i8* > %1 = call i8* @malloc(i64 1) > store i8* %1, i8** %0 > call void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %0, i8* null) > ret i32 0 > } > > declare i8* @malloc...

Hi, If I type define i32 @main() gc "shadow-stack" { entry: %0 = alloca i8* %1 = call i8* @malloc(i64 1) store i8* %1, i8** %0 call void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %0, i8* null) ret i32 0 } declare i8* @malloc(i64) declare void @llvm.gcroot(i8**, i8*) nounwind in test.ll and then do > llc test.ll > gcc test.s I get the error ld: in

...r is trying to omit the LSDA by marking that the FDE has a zero sized augmentation data. > > I'll have to research if this is a valid dwarf unwind optimization. Even if it is, it is tripping up the existing linker. > > -Nick > > > On Apr 10, 2011, at 6:06 AM, Nicolas Ojeda Bar wrote: >> Hi, >> >> If I type >> >> define i32 @main() gc "shadow-stack" { >> entry: >> %0 = alloca i8* >> %1 = call i8* @malloc(i64 1) >> store i8* %1, i8** %0 >> call void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %0, i8* null) >> ret i32...

Hi, Is it necessary to emit all the calls to @llvm.gcroot in the entry block of each function, or can I emit them anywhere on the function? Thanks, N

Hello, I am writing a compiler for a functional language and am using the fastcc calling convention extensibly. I am now thinking about how to implement exception handling (about which I know close to nothing) and was hoping to use the support for exception handling built-in llvm. Question: can I use the standard __cxa_throw (and personality function) from C++ and the llvm eh machinery even if

Congratulations for the baby !! I would like to thank those lots of people who have made such a nice work and who have been so generous with your efforts. Jorge Luis Ojeda Cabrera Dep. M?todosEstad?sticos Fac. De Ciencias, U. de Zaragoza Pedro Crbuna,12 50009 Zaragoza Espa?a -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "hel...