search for: p_addrs

> How is c's const keyword translated when compiling c into > llvm bytecode. It isn't. You can verify this quite simply with the following test program: void a(const void *p) { } void b(void *p) { } $ clang --emit-llvm test.c ; ModuleID = 'foo' define void @a(i8* %p) { entry: %p.addr = alloca i8* ; <i8**> [#uses=1] %allocapt = bitcast

...p_wrkrs p_xaddr Each policy may or may not have a corresponding record in one of these other tables - if it does it could be a one-to-many or a one-to-one relationship. Is there a way to create new nouns in RoR so that I could create the corresponding plurals like: p_2quots p_addrs p_ccs . . etc and the system would work as normal? Thanks, Phil. -- Philip Rhoades Pricom Pty Limited (ACN 003 252 275 ABN 91 003 252 275) GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Mobile: +61:(0)411-185-652 Fax: +61:(0)2-8221-9599 E-mail: phil@...

How is c's const keyword translated when compiling c into llvm bytecode. I'm specifically interested in const pointer function arguments. Consider a function declared as follows in c: void f(const int* arg); When I examine f in llvm bytecode, how can I tell that arg is a pointer, whose contents can only be read, not written. Regards, Ryan

...p_wrkrs p_xaddr Each policy may or may not have a corresponding record in one of these other tables - if it does it could be a one-to-many or a one-to-one relationship. Is there a way to create new nouns in RoR so that I could create plurals like: p_2quots p_addrs p_ccs . . etc and the system would work as normal? Thanks, Phil. -- Philip Rhoades Pricom Pty Limited (ACN 003 252 275 ABN 91 003 252 275) GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Mobile: +61:(0)411-185-652 Fax: +61:(0)2-8221-9599 E-mail: phil@...

Hi, all, We are working on a static analysis phase on LLVM's IR, we want to do a backforward phase through the use-def chain, I knew that LLVM had a built-in SSA form which provide the use-def chain for virtual register variables, however, I want to know if you also provide some kinds of use-def chain for memory operations? for example, I have the following source code int foo(int *q, int

On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:02 AM, Tianwei wrote: > Hi, all, > We are working on a static analysis phase on LLVM's IR, we want to do a backforward phase through the use-def chain, I knew that LLVM > had a built-in SSA form which provide the use-def chain for virtual register variables, however, I want to know if you also provide some kinds of use-def chain for memory operations? for

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Jeff Cohen wrote: > I noticed that fourinarow is one of the programs in which LLVM is much slower > than GCC, so I decided to take a look and see why that is so. The program > has many loops that look like this: > > #define ROWS 6 > #define COLS 7 > > void init_board(char b[COLS][ROWS+1]) > { > int i,j; > > for

I''m testing the http module in console. BUt I got the following error. Anyone knows why? >> Net::HTTP.get_print ''www.google.com'', ''index.html'' SystemStackError: stack level too deep from C:/InstantRails/ruby/lib/ruby/1.8/net/http.rb:451:in `newobj'' from C:/InstantRails/ruby/lib/ruby/1.8/net/http.rb:451:in

Sorry, I thought I was running selection dag isel but I screwed up when trying out the really big array. You're right, it does clean it up except for the multiplication. So LoopStrengthReduce is not ready for prime time and doesn't actually get used? I might consider whipping it into shape. Does it still have to handle getelementptr in its full generality? Chris Lattner wrote:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Jeff Cohen wrote: > Sorry, I thought I was running selection dag isel but I screwed up when > trying out the really big array. You're right, it does clean it up except > for the multiplication. > > So LoopStrengthReduce is not ready for prime time and doesn't actually get > used? I don't know what the status of it is. You could try it out,

If you're one of the people who has cvsup'd to 4.8-stable since August 8th and you've since begun to experience panics on a previously stable system, please apply the attached patch and see if your previous stability has been restored. Please tell me your results. Thanks, Mike "Silby" Silbersack -------------- next part -------------- diff -u -r

I noticed that fourinarow is one of the programs in which LLVM is much slower than GCC, so I decided to take a look and see why that is so. The program has many loops that look like this: #define ROWS 6 #define COLS 7 void init_board(char b[COLS][ROWS+1]) { int i,j; for (i=0;i<COLS;i++) for (j=0;j<ROWS;j++) b[i][j]='.';

My wife got the following from a system running (effectively) 4.8-RELEASE (I built/installed world just before the kernel version was updated from 4.8-RC to 4.8-RELEASE). I gather she made a few attempts to get mozilla to start and then the system panic'd. According to the crashdump, p->p_leader is NULL but according to the code, this can never happen. This is a UP Athlon XP-1800 with