Displaying 12 results from an estimated 12 matches for "varint".
Did you mean:
variant
2013 Jan 11
2
[LLVMdev] Make a comparation with IR builder
...id understand what I make wrong.
What I try to do is a compare a local variable with a constant.
But when I create a ICMP instruction I get that instruction are not of
same type.
I'm using llvm by svn repository updated at two week ago.
The code that I try to generation is something like:
if varInt = 1 then
varInt := 10;
end_if;
This is my code:
void *visit(integer_c *symbol) {
int64_t value = GET_CVALUE(int64, symbol);
if (typeid(*currentType) == typeid(get_datatype_info_c::bool_type_name)) {
std::cout << "Creating integer: " << value << st...
2013 Jan 11
2
[LLVMdev] Make a comparation with IR builder
...a compare a local variable with a constant.
> But when I create a ICMP instruction I get that instruction are
> not of same type.
> I'm using llvm by svn repository updated at two week ago.
>
> The code that I try to generation is something like:
>
> if varInt = 1 then
> varInt := 10;
> end_if;
>
>
> This is my code:
>
> void *visit(integer_c *symbol) {
> int64_t value = GET_CVALUE(int64, symbol);
> if (typeid(*currentType) ==
> typeid(get_datatype_info_c::bool_type_n...
2013 Jan 11
0
[LLVMdev] Make a comparation with IR builder
...What I try to do is a compare a local variable with a constant.
> But when I create a ICMP instruction I get that instruction are not of
> same type.
> I'm using llvm by svn repository updated at two week ago.
>
> The code that I try to generation is something like:
>
> if varInt = 1 then
> varInt := 10;
> end_if;
>
>
> This is my code:
>
> void *visit(integer_c *symbol) {
> int64_t value = GET_CVALUE(int64, symbol);
> if (typeid(*currentType) == typeid(get_datatype_info_c::**bool_type_name))
> {
> st...
2013 Jan 11
0
[LLVMdev] Make a comparation with IR builder
...re a local variable with a constant.
>> But when I create a ICMP instruction I get that instruction are not of
>> same type.
>> I'm using llvm by svn repository updated at two week ago.
>>
>> The code that I try to generation is something like:
>>
>> if varInt = 1 then
>> varInt := 10;
>> end_if;
>>
>>
>> This is my code:
>>
>> void *visit(integer_c *symbol) {
>> int64_t value = GET_CVALUE(int64, symbol);
>> if (typeid(*currentType) ==
>> typeid(get_datatype_info_c:...
2013 Nov 13
3
[LLVMdev] How to reduce the footprint of MDNodes? (About the comment you made at BOF LTO)
...s no reason for the original metadata node you describe to not *encode* its operands into a dense bit-packed blob of memory. We can still expose APIs that manipulate them as separate entities, and have the AsmPrinter and AsmParser map back and forth with nice human-readable forms. But even a simple varint encoding will be both smaller and faster than ascii.
I guess you could make it work, but would that actually be simpler than what is proposed? If it is denser, how much denser would it have to be to justify the complexity?
> Just to be clear, I still want the nice format (much like your propo...
2013 Nov 13
0
[LLVMdev] How to reduce the footprint of MDNodes? (About the comment you made at BOF LTO)
...original metadata
> node you describe to not *encode* its operands into a dense bit-packed blob
> of memory. We can still expose APIs that manipulate them as separate
> entities, and have the AsmPrinter and AsmParser map back and forth with
> nice human-readable forms. But even a simple varint encoding will be both
> smaller and faster than ascii.
>
>
> I guess you could make it work, but would that actually be simpler than
> what is proposed? If it is denser, how much denser would it have to be to
> justify the complexity?
>
I don't think it would be more comp...
2013 Nov 12
0
[LLVMdev] How to reduce the footprint of MDNodes? (About the comment you made at BOF LTO)
...s no reason for the original metadata
node you describe to not *encode* its operands into a dense bit-packed blob
of memory. We can still expose APIs that manipulate them as separate
entities, and have the AsmPrinter and AsmParser map back and forth with
nice human-readable forms. But even a simple varint encoding will be both
smaller and faster than ascii.
Just to be clear, I still want the nice format (much like your proposed
format, but maybe with the numbers outside of the "s) in the textual IR, I
just think we should use a more direct and efficient in-memory encoding
(and in-bitcode encod...
2013 Nov 12
3
[LLVMdev] How to reduce the footprint of MDNodes? (About the comment you made at BOF LTO)
Hi Manman (and llvmdev),
I filed these two bugs to track the ideas that I was cooking:
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17891
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=17892
TL;DR: I'm saying we should go from:
!14 = metadata !{i32 786445, metadata !1, metadata !10, metadata !"y", i32 3, i64 32, i64 32, i64 32, i32 0, metadata !13}
to:
!14 = metadata
2014 Dec 24
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC][PATCH][OPENCL] synchronization scopes redux
...with having the text format use a symbolic thing for both
extremes. It doesn't seem super important, but it seems nice.
Regarding the bitcode encoding, I would consider whether one encoding is
more space efficient than another. I don't recall whether we default to
zero or whether we use a varint encoding in the bitcode here, but if we do,
it would make sense to optimize the encoding around cross thread being the
most common. I'm not really a bitcode expert, so I'd rather defer to
someone who has hacked on this part of LLVM more recently there.
I can try to take a look at the highe...
2013 Nov 13
3
[LLVMdev] How to reduce the footprint of MDNodes? (About the comment you made at BOF LTO)
...a
>> node you describe to not *encode* its operands into a dense bit-packed blob
>> of memory. We can still expose APIs that manipulate them as separate
>> entities, and have the AsmPrinter and AsmParser map back and forth with
>> nice human-readable forms. But even a simple varint encoding will be both
>> smaller and faster than ascii.
>>
>>
>> I guess you could make it work, but would that actually be simpler than
>> what is proposed? If it is denser, how much denser would it have to be to
>> justify the complexity?
>>
>
> I...
2014 Dec 11
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC][PATCH][OPENCL] synchronization scopes redux
Hi all,
Attached is a sequence of patches that changes the IR to support more
than two synchronization scopes. This is still a work in progress, and
these patches are only meant to start a more detailed discussion on the
way forward.
One big issue is the absence of any backend that actually makes use of
intermediate synchronization scopes. This work is meant to be just one
part of the
2007 Jun 15
0
Wine release 0.9.39
...------------------------------------------------------
Changes since 0.9.38:
Alex Villac?s Lasso (6):
oleaut32: Support for VT_DISPATCH in VarAbs.
oleaut32: Support for VT_DISPATCH in VarNot.
oleaut32: Support for VT_DISPATCH in VarFix.
oleaut32: Support for VT_DISPATCH in VarInt.
oleaut32: Support for VT_DISPATCH in VarNeg.
oleaut32: Support for VT_DISPATCH in VarRound.
Alexander Nicolaysen S?rnes (12):
wordpad: Split code into set_caption function.
wordpad: Store file name globally.
wordpad: Add file saving support.
wordpad: Improve fi...