similar to: [LLVMdev] Getting A Type By Name

Hi, I'm working on bug 122, consolidating the interface to the SymbolTable class. In doing so, I found the function below which traverses the symbol table but apparently unnecessarily. Before I remove the traversal, I thought I better check with you guys. Posted this to the list because it looks like _everyone_ has edited this file :) In the code below, the IOB variable is the only thing in

I mis-stated what I think should be deleted. The block of code from "GlobalVariable *IOB = 0;" to the end of the loop should be delted because the only effect the loop has is on the IOB variable and that variable is never used after the loop. Reid. On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 18:14, Reid Spencer wrote: > Hi, > > I'm working on bug 122, consolidating the interface to the

And, one more weird thing in this function. The FILESize static variable is never initialized so its likely initial value is 0 due to zero fill on many MMUs. The value is never written and used as a divisor. Why hasn't this function caused an arithmetic violation? Because the IOBBase point, also a static variable is initialized to zero and never modified and used in a conditional that thwarts

On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 07:01:55PM -0600, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, John Carrino wrote: > > >On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 04:05:32PM +0300, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote: > >>>>Is assert(!NewSTy->isAbstract()) must pass after this line? > >>> > >>>In this case, yup. > >>> > >>I create test program and assert

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, John Carrino wrote: >> In practice, this is leads to a horrible mess, as you've noticed. As >> such, I'd suggest using Module::addTypeName to give these things names so >> that you have a hope to understand them and so they are more compact :) > > I took your advide and used Module::addTypeName which is a great idea > that I didn't know

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, John Carrino wrote: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 04:05:32PM +0300, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote: >>>> Is assert(!NewSTy->isAbstract()) must pass after this line? >>> >>> In this case, yup. >>> >> I create test program and assert failed in it: >> >> { \2 *, sbyte * } > > How do I decode the \2 in this? I am

LLVMers, On the way to resolving bug 122, I am committing my SymbolTable rewrite. If you are working on anything that uses the SymbolTable, I suggest you read the documentation in include/llvm/SymbolTable.h. The changes I've committed reduce the use of Type::TypeTy. This static member will go away in the future, so please do not propagate new code that uses it. There is no reason to use it

On Jul 22, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Gabor Greif wrote: > Am 22.07.2010 um 00:21 schrieb Chris Lattner: > >> On Jul 21, 2010, at 12:49 PM, Eugene Toder wrote: >>> Is this a recommended approach/good style/good idea to use >>> dyn_cast_or_null<X>(I) instead of dyn_cast_or_null<X>(*I)? (And other >>> is and cast functions). >> >> We

E.g. Is it intended to be allowed to call lld::elf::link in 2 different threads at the same time? Follows is an example Valgrind error I ran into when doing the above. I'll try putting a global resource lock on invoking LLD and see if it solves the problem. ==5467== Invalid write of size 8 ==5467== at 0x525509: llvm::DenseMapBase<llvm::DenseMap<llvm::CachedHashStringRef, int,

Hi Andrew, LLD relies on various bits of global state which are manipulated during the link, so I wouldn't expect it to be thread safe at that level, although it does attempt to reset that global state at the start of each call to link(), so it should be callable sequentially. Regards, James On 25 July 2018 at 02:37, Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

I was looking at the SymbolTable code in LLD COFF and ELF recently, and I’m confused by the use of CachedHashStringRef. From what I understand, a CachedHashStringRef combines a StringRef with a computed hash. There’s no caching going on in the CachedHashStringRef itself; that is, if you construct CachedHashStringRef("foo"), and then construct a second

The SymbolTable is a map of Type* to a map of names to Value*. This means that in order to lookup something by name you first have to know what type it is. For the basic types this is fine because you generally always know which basic type you're after. But, for derived types, this can be quite complicated. It isn't always possible to know the exact type. In XPL, types are just names.

Am 22.07.2010 um 23:29 schrieb Chris Lattner: > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Gabor Greif wrote: > >> Am 22.07.2010 um 00:21 schrieb Chris Lattner: >> >>> On Jul 21, 2010, at 12:49 PM, Eugene Toder wrote: >>>> Is this a recommended approach/good style/good idea to use >>>> dyn_cast_or_null<X>(I) instead of

Hi! in the description of llvm::cast it says: But it will correctly return NULL when the input is NULL. And in the description of llvm::cast_or_null it says: Functionally identical to cast, except that a null value is accepted This sounds to me as if both functions accept a null pointer. What is then the difference between cast and cast_or_null? -Jochen

On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I recently updated my version of LLVM from revision 140108 to 142082, and >> several things broke, most of which were easily fixed. However, I'm now >> getting a "pure virtual method called"

I really can't figure out how to get and set array indices from the c interface. so to get an element I'm calling tindex = *fn\SymbolTable(*index\name) index = LLVMBuildLoad(builder,tindex,"index") arr = *fn\SymbolTable(*array\name) arrptr = LLVMBuildLoad(Builder,arr,"arrayptr") tmp = LLVMBuildGEP(Builder,arrptr,index,0,"ptr") ptr =

I was trying to look through the SymbolTable code for LLVM. What does the SymbolTable for a Module contain? Is it just GlobalVariables and Functions? How are program constants and static variables declared within functions handled? When I said program constants, I meant things like strings (e.g., char* foo = "Hello world\n";). Thanks in advance. Sincerely, Brian Brian M.

On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > I recently updated my version of LLVM from revision 140108 to 142082, and > several things broke, most of which were easily fixed. However, I'm now > getting a "pure virtual method called" exception (__cxa_pure_virtual) which > I wasn't getting before. This is happening in the destructor of

Interestingly, I also get a similar error in a different executable (my unittest): pure virtual method called terminate called without an active exception 0 tartc 0x00000001010a8265 PrintStackTrace(void*) + 53 1 tartc 0x00000001010a88cc SignalHandler(int) + 364 2 libSystem.B.dylib 0x00007fff831341ba _sigtramp + 26 3 libSystem.B.dylib 0x7261742e65637365 _sigtramp +

I recently updated my version of LLVM from revision 140108 to 142082, and several things broke, most of which were easily fixed. However, I'm now getting a "pure virtual method called" exception (__cxa_pure_virtual) which I wasn't getting before. This is happening in the destructor of a statically-initialized object. (More precisely, it's blowing up in a BumpPtrAllocator,