similar to: Can creating new forms of debug info metadata be simplified? [formatting fixed]

+some of the debug info cabal (& Duncan, as an emeritus member, and person who plumbed a lot of the current debug info syntax support in) Visitor seems plausible though I haven't looked at the code in detail to see if it'd work perfectly. On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 7:56 AM Sohail Somani (Fizz Buzz Inc.) via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > [Resending due to

> On May 29, 2018, at 12:28 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > +some of the debug info cabal (& Duncan, as an emeritus member, and person who plumbed a lot of the current debug info syntax support in) > > Visitor seems plausible though I haven't looked at the code in detail to see if it'd work perfectly. > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 7:56

> On May 29, 2018, at 12:55, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > > >> On May 29, 2018, at 12:28 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> +some of the debug info cabal (& Duncan, as an emeritus member, and person who plumbed a lot of the current debug info syntax support in) >>

Thanks all for your response. On Tue, May 29, 2018, at 5:38 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: > > >> On May 29, 2018, at 12:55, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On May 29, 2018, at 12:28 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> +some of the debug info cabal (& Duncan, as an

Hi list, Let’s talk about adding a new type of debug info metadata. Here are the steps (at minimum - probably incomplete) one needs to take: 1. Create a new class in the hierarchy 2. Implement two forms of MD_NODE_GET 3. Specialize MDNodeKeyImpl 4. Modify LLParser.cpp and add serialization code for your special type 5. Modify AsmWriter.cpp and add serialization code for your special

Regarding flags, I was just thinking that maybe we should invent a new DISubprogramFlags type. DISubprogram already has a few bitfields for subprogram-specific things, Fortran will want 3 more, and there's no reason to fill up the generic DIFlags with more bits that are used in only one class. I agree that the array stuff needs to be designed with an eye to handling how other languages do

> On May 29, 2018, at 15:33, Sohail Somani (Fizz Buzz Inc.) <sohail at fizzbuzzinc.com> wrote: > > Thanks all for your response. > > On Tue, May 29, 2018, at 5:38 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: >> >> >>> On May 29, 2018, at 12:55, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On May 29,

Hi list, Is there a standards based reason why the DIFlags enum is set to uint32_t[1]? I am sure my DWARF-std-reading-fu is not up to snuff and so I cannot seem to find it. The reason I ask is that we are running out of space for our own DIFlags and would like to nail this down before deciding on an approach. Thanks! Sohail [1] The code in question:

On 11-06-12 7:40 PM, John McCall wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > >> > On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> > >>> >> Hi Sohail, >>> >> >>>> >>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? >>> >> >>> >> not currently. The

On 11-06-12 8:53 PM, John McCall wrote: >> > The CFG point is a valid point. In what I've read on the topic so far >> > (yay Internet), it seems like the CFG would have to represent the fact >> > that control can jump to a handler after nearly every instruction in the >> > presence of async exceptions. The Hotspot compiler probably does this. >> >

Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? --------------------------------------------------------------- Summary: Need new LLVM instructions or extending of all instructions. C++ exceptions are synchronous: the compiler knows when/where they are being raised. Asynchronous exceptions can be raised at any time. For example, an integer divide-by-zero may raise an

On Jun 12, 2011, at 5:31 PM, Sohail Somani wrote: > On 11-06-12 7:40 PM, John McCall wrote: >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: >> >>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Hi Sohail, >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous

On 11-06-12 12:01 AM, Sohail Somani wrote: > Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Summary: Need new LLVM instructions or extending of all instructions. > > C++ exceptions are synchronous: the compiler knows when/where they are > being raised. > > Asynchronous exceptions can

This renables the ability for Ruby 1.8 environments to perform reexecs --- lib/unicorn/http_server.rb | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/unicorn/http_server.rb b/lib/unicorn/http_server.rb index 2decd77..9a5795c 100644 --- a/lib/unicorn/http_server.rb +++ b/lib/unicorn/http_server.rb @@ -449,13 +449,14 @@ class Unicorn::HttpServer end

Hello, many of our platforms do not have a integrated floppy, some even don''t have a floppy controller. As pxelinux still has a problem with machines without a floppy in combination with some bios versions I need to chainload a different bootstrap loader which works on the floppyless platforms. But I also need to load a BartPE and the other BS loader does not support that. So I tried to

hi , i have downloaded the asterisk@home software from the web ..but i have a little confusion about that ...either i wrote in blank cd as it is or some bootable media is required for it...as it is in zip format...BUT it is a .ISO file ...tell me ...what should i do...it will run automatically when i reboot system and first boot device is CDROm...thankssss -- Muhammad Sohail Arham U.E.T. Lahore

Hi everyone, I am a new one for that lists....actually i have final year project on VOIP & IMS ...so i want to install asterisk on my pc ...IS it possble that ...we can call on small LAN network without buying any card...i will clear my point as that...suppose i have a linux machine on which i want to install asterisk and HOW it will install...and second point is that ..i have 2

On Jun 12, 2011, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> >>> Hi Sohail, >>> >>>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? >>> >>> not currently. The first step in this direction is to get rid of the

On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Sohail, > >> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions? > > not currently. The first step in this direction is to get rid of the invoke > instruction and attach exception handling information to basic blocks. See > http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExceptionHandlingChanges.txt > for a

On Jun 12, 2011, at 11:24 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Jun 12, 2011, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: >> >>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Sohail, >>>> >>>>> Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?