Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "parseidentifier".
2015 Feb 05
4
[LLVMdev] Fwd: [cfe-dev] freebsd-mips64 unhandled .cpsetup
Moving to llvmdev, as this is not a clang issue.
David
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> Date: 5 February 2015 17:00:34 GMT
> From: Sean Bruno <sbruno at ignoranthack.me>
> To: cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: [cfe-dev] freebsd-mips64 unhandled .cpsetup
> Reply-To: sbruno at freebsd.org
>
>
> I'm taking a journey to try and get a clang/llvm build of
2010 Jun 21
2
[LLVMdev] MC: Object file specific parsing
...ual bool ParseInstruction(const StringRef &Name, SMLoc NameLoc,
+ SmallVectorImpl<MCParsedAsmOperand*> &Operands) = 0;
+ virtual const MCSection *getInitialTextSection() = 0;
/// }
-private:
+protected:
+
+ bool TokError(const char *Msg);
+
+ /// ParseIdentifier - Parse an identifier or string (as a quoted identifier)
+ /// and set \arg Res to the identifier contents.
+ bool ParseIdentifier(StringRef &Res);
+
MCSymbol *CreateSymbol(StringRef Name);
+private:
bool ParseStatement();
-
- bool TokError(const char *Msg);
void PrintMessage(...
2013 Dec 19
1
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] MC: handle .cfi_startproc simple
...at apple.com>
> Cc: Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon at gmail.com>
> ---
> This time, I know for certain that I've done something stupid because
> a huge number of tests break. Did I misunderstand how
> parseIdentifier() is meant to be used? Am I atleast passing this
> Simple bool around correctly, and appending " simple" in the low asm
> layer appropriately? What am I missing?
>
> Thanks.
>
> include/llvm/MC/MCStreamer.h | 2 +-
> lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/DwarfC...
2015 Feb 16
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] freebsd-mips64 unhandled .cpsetup
...parseExpression() but I am unfamiliar with the syntax to do
>> this for .cpsetup.
>>
>> If you do look into this, let me know and I'll bang on it in my
>> clang36 pre-release tree.
>>
>> sean
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> I've managed to replace parseIdentifier() with parseExpression()
> and you're example doesn't give an error anymore, but I'm not sure
> that what we end up generating is correct. I need a little more
> time to find out.
>
> In the meantime, could you open a ticket on llvm.org/bugs ?
>
> Thanks for worki...