search for: selectors

Hi Duncan, I hacked together a version of DwarfEHPrepare.cpp which tries to deal with the ordering of llvm.eh.exception and llvm.eh.selector. The hacked is contained within the attached patch. Motivation: I recently created a decent amount of hand coded IR (via the llvm C++ API). In order to help me runtime debug the code, I created automatic constructors which would trace entries into the

hiya, i want the selector that would return a <tr> of a table if any td contains some text, so i can use it in click_link_within e.g. When I click the "show" link within the row containing "user at example.com" When /^I click the "(.+)" link within the row containing "(.+)"$/ do | link, text| selector = ?? click_link_within selector, link

...eption code really needs to be rewritten to make use of the new SSAUpdator (then all the mucking around with domtree can go away; it's quite tricky to preserve dominfo when updating the IR, and the whole dom approach is inefficient), and (2) the eh.selector case is much more complicated because selectors carry type infos (and filters) around with them. Sadly, you can just move selectors to the landing pad(s) their exception objects come from, since you might end up with multiple selectors there, and because the order of type infos matters, you can't just concatenate the type info lists. It...

Just a quick heads up that Sylvain Zimmer has posted a performance upgrade for Prototype''s $$ selector, making the function up to 20 times faster. This could be just the thing I''ve been looking for recently as a site I''m currently developing makes heavy usage of that $$ selector and I have noticed that this can lead to a noticeable lag on page load. See

How do I get the keyboard layout selector in gdm login for 6.3? I have language selector but no keyboard layout selector. -- Robert Arkiletian Eric Hamber Secondary, Vancouver, Canada

I am bit confused with this function. Should I be able to pass in a DOM element e.g. someAjaxRequest.responseXML and interrogate it ? Seems not but perhaps I am missing something... TIA Matt

...{ > A a; > throw 5.0; > } > main() { > try { > f(); > } catch(...) { printf("caught\n"); } > } this example indeed shows the problem. Let me explain to see if we agree on what the problem is. Suppose we don't artificially add catch-alls to selectors. Then the above example compiles to: define void @_Z1fv() { ... invoke void @__cxa_throw( something ) noreturn to label %somewhere unwind label %lpad ... lpad: %eh_ptr = tail call i8* @llvm.eh.exception( ) %eh_select8 = tail call i32 (i8*, i8*, ...)...

Hello, Is it possible to execute Objective-C code using LLVM JIT? The original point for my research is this topic on StackOverflow: All selectors unrecognised when invoking Objective-C methods using the LLVM ExecutionEngine http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10375324/all-selectors-unrecognised-when-invoking-objective-c-methods-using-the-llvm-exec <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10375324/all-selectors-unrecognised-when-invoking-objecti...

Hi there first of all, many thanks to some people out there for their advice on building LLVM on Cygwin (this would be Aaron Gray, Reid Spencer, Tanya and Chris Lattner i suppose). LLVM 2.1 seems to build in debug mode on my "old" Cygwin (1.5.15). At least everything except tblgen is build. For tblgen i use the supplied mingw binaries, many thanks for that! I would like now to ask you

I just ran across this bug when trying to re-create Ben Nolan''s behaviour.js with prototype and was wondering if anyone had fixed it before I went re-inventing the wheel :) Thanks! -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ kitchen-RA8HwDor7flnDGu+y90WmgC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org http://ipaction.org/ -- defend your rights to fair use _______________________________________________

Hi everyone, llvm is great! But there is one exception ;) llvm components are generally fast, but instruction selection is slooow. Let me explain. I am developing a toolkit for building virtual machines which can automatically generate a JIT compiler using the interpreter specification. llvm does the hard work of machine code generation. (Thanks to you all) I discovered that JIT compilation is

I accidentally ran into a JIT scenario where a call instruction, executing an external non-generated C function, executed between a llvm.eh.exception and a llvm.eh.selector instruction would clobber the register (register index __builtin_eh_return_data_regno(1)), used by the return value of llvm.eh.selector. The behavior of the call depends on the function called even though none of the

Here is an alternative proposal to Bill's. It is closer to what we already have (which can be seen as a good or a bad thing!), and is also closer to what gcc does. It is more incremental than Bill's and introduces fewer new concepts. Executive summary ----------------- Remove the personality and list of catches out of eh.selector and stick them directly on invoke instructions. The

Refactor this code to use guestfs_int_split_string function which slightly simplifies it. This should have no effect. --- options/keys.c | 35 ++++++++++++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/options/keys.c b/options/keys.c index f783066..74b5497 100644 --- a/options/keys.c +++ b/options/keys.c @@ -153,49 +153,42 @@ get_key (struct key_store

Hi, I've been studying the global instruction selector introduced recently. One of the properties of global instruction selectors is that they select instructions across basic blocks such that they can get more information in order to choose optimal patterns. However, the current global isel implementation still iterates over BBs within functions, which is same as the original SelectionDAG approach, and select individual inst...

...;> main() { >> try { >> f(); >> } catch(...) { printf("caught\n"); } >> } > > this example indeed shows the problem. Let me explain to see if we > agree on what > the problem is. Suppose we don't artificially add catch-alls to > selectors. Then > the above example compiles to: > > define void @_Z1fv() { > ... > invoke void @__cxa_throw( something ) noreturn > to label %somewhere unwind label %lpad > ... > lpad: > %eh_ptr = tail call i8* @llvm.eh.exception( ) >...

Hi Garrison, > I accidentally ran into a JIT scenario where a call instruction, executing an external non-generated C function, > executed between a llvm.eh.exception and a llvm.eh.selector instruction would clobber the register > (register index __builtin_eh_return_data_regno(1)), used by the return value of llvm.eh.selector. The behavior > of the call depends on the function

(Mail system seems to have eaten this, sorry if it's a repeat) On Dec 8, 2007, at 12:48 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Dale, > >> - Why was C++ claiming that every selector has a catch-all handler? > > this is easy: because the semantics of invoke require it. Yes, > really. > If unwinding reaches an invoke then control is required to jump to the > unwind basic

Full_Name: Kevin Wright Version: 1.8.0 OS: Windows 95 Submission from: (NULL) (170.54.59.160) This bug also happens to me using R 1.9.0 on Windows 2000. Took me a long time to create a reproducible bug, but I think I have succeeded. I suspect my test function has a bug, but I don't see anything wrong. Plus, the bug only shows up when selecting certain filenames. Nearest I can speculate,

Hi James, > I get the expected output (after changing i32 @llvm.eh.selector() to i64 > llvm.eh.selector.i64()) in top-of-tree, llvm.eh.selector.i64 has been removed (though bitcode will autoupgrade) and there is only i32 @llvm.eh.selector(), which is why my example was written this way. Ciao, Duncan.