similar to: [LLVMdev] printing constants

Sir, Given code like: > > X = add int Y, 1 > Z = mul int X, 17 while I iterate over the operands of the first instruction i want to print the variable x ,as well as the constant 1 and while i iterate over the second instruction i want to print variable x and constant 17. what should I do? thanking you, yours sincerely, anubham suresh TU-Darmstadt --- llvmdev-request at

On 2/26/06, Dmitriy Abramov <dmitriy.abramov at star-force.com> wrote: > > > > Hello. > > > > After llvm-java front-end compilation under cygwin I have encountered with > the problem. Compilation successfully complete but the assertion message > displayed while running application class2llvm.exe. class2llvm is by no means complete and hasn't been actively

Hi, This question is mostly addressed at Alkis, as I understand that he last worked on llvm-java and I saw him reply to another thread recently :-) When I try and run class2llvm I get a bus error because function_ in VMMethod points to 0x8. I think the problem lies in how I am using class2llvm. When I read through the Debug output, I see that class2llvm is trying to compile all of the

hello everybody, here I have a question regarding printing of the constants( like 2 .63 etc.,) present in the instruction while iterating over the instructions within a basic block . I am able to print the vaiables but not the constants. Can you please tell me how to get the constants printed out while iterating over the instructions because the constants do not have names as the variables do(

Sir, I am using LLVM Compiler for my Maters Dissertation work. So I want to include one chapter on LLVM in my report. Can I copy some of the figures from your documentation which is available on the net and keep them in my work ? thanking you, yours sincerely, Suresh Anubham TU-Darmstadt Germany Anubham Suresh Measurement and Instrumentation Electrical Department IIT Roorkee Current

Hello. After llvm-java front-end compilation under cygwin I have encountered with the problem. Compilation successfully complete but the assertion message displayed while running application class2llvm.exe. C:\SRC_CVS\COPY\llvm\tools\llvm-java\Debug\bin>class2llvm.exe assertion "Ty->isInteger() && Ty->isSigned() && "Illegal type for signed integer

On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 04:29, anubham suresh wrote: > hi everyone, > here i have a question: > is there any chance in llvm intermediate > representation to compare whether a operand (ie a > value) is used as a user without iterating over all > the instructions in a basic block. > i will explain this with an example: > i=p+4; > j=i+p; > > in the above example i

hi everyone, here i have a question: is there any chance in llvm intermediate representation to compare whether a operand (ie a value) is used as a user without iterating over all the instructions in a basic block. i will explain this with an example: i=p+4; j=i+p; in the above example i mean p,4,i,p which are on the RHS are operands and the terms i,j which are on the LHS are users. so what i

On Sat, 2005-08-27 at 11:47 -0700, Reid Spencer wrote: > Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: > > It seems that these two classes are the same... Maybe they should be > > merged into 1 class? > > > I think you're looking at something old. MutexLocker doesn't exist any more. llvm/Support/ThreadSupport.h is not generated anymore? -- Alkis

On 08/09/05, Alkis Evlogimenos <evlogimenos at gmail.com> wrote: > to those coalesced registers, it is logical that noone will ever query > the liveness of those registers (unless there is a bug somewhere in the Indeed the coalesced registers may logically not be queried since they do not appear in any operand list of the machine code, but the VarInfo::DefInst in VirtRegInfo of the

On 08/09/05, Alkis Evlogimenos <evlogimenos at gmail.com> wrote: > representative register (found using a union find algorithm). Note that > the representative register could be a real register if we ever joined > an interval of a real register with one of a virtual register (and this > real register will be the representative register of the set of > intervals joined

On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 05:26, Vladimir Prus wrote: > Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: > > On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 04:56, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > > Hello! > > > Is there an (semi)automatic way to save registers used by a function? For > > > example, on my target I have to store ar0-ar4 and gr0-gr4, gr5, gr6. For > > > now I just emit huge prologue code to push

Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: > On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 04:56, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > Hello! > > Is there an (semi)automatic way to save registers used by a function? For > > example, on my target I have to store ar0-ar4 and gr0-gr4, gr5, gr6. For > > now I just emit huge prologue code to push them all to stack -- even if > > they are not modified at all. > > >

Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: > On 4/25/06, Archie Cobbs <archie at dellroad.org> wrote: >> Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: >>> On 4/25/06, Archie Cobbs <archie at dellroad.org> wrote: >>>> Motivation: Java's "first active use" requirement for class initialization. >>>> When invoking a static method, it's possible that a class may need to

Actually, <algorithm> is not correct. This remove is in stdio.h and io.h in VC7.1. It removes a file, not elements from a collection. The proper solution is to not use remove at all and use Path::destroy_file(). On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:09:37 -0700 Jeff Cohen <jeffc at jolt-lang.org> wrote: > <algorithm> works too. > > On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:09:21 -0500 > Alkis

<algorithm> works too. On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:09:21 -0500 Alkis Evlogimenos <alkis at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote: > On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 09:43, Paolo Invernizzi wrote: > > Jeff Cohen wrote: > > > > >But I compiled that under vc7.1 as it was! > > > > > > > > ;-(( > > > > Probably is an implicid includes, but I'm using the

Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: >As for CVS, I am not sure this should be fixed because there is >really no LLVM bug here :-) > > > No, you are right. But perhaps it is worth it to mention the problem somewhere in the documentation, because there appear to be many installations with this problem (I've found 3: my home installation, my work and the nearest university), and it is

Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: > > But the test still has a problem ;-) > > > > printf("%ld\n", Arg / (1LL << 4)); > > > > Again, the passed value is long long, and format specifier is '%ld'. What > > about the attached patch? > > I think testL has another problem. It takes a long argument which in C I > think is a 4-byte int,

Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: > It seems that these two classes are the same... Maybe they should be > merged into 1 class? > I think you're looking at something old. MutexLocker doesn't exist any more. Reid.

On Friday 14 November 2003 12:24 pm, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Alkis Evlogimenos wrote: > > #include "" should only be used when headers are specified using relative > > paths. In our case the majority of header inclusions (if not all) use > > relative paths so we may want to consider either converting all our > > #include "" to