similar to: [LLVMdev] Patch IntrinsicEmitter for VS

Hi, The actual tableGen generate a chain of if/then/else for the intrinsic which is too long for VS 2005, and result in a compile error. I did a small change in table gen so that the if aren't chained so that I could compile (patch attached). This double the algorithmic complexity of the function but it seems that this wasn't a problem. If speed is needed here, we could hash the string

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: > Le 06/03/2010 11:43, José Fonseca a écrit : >> >> Attached are two patches with MSVC build enchancements. >> >> They are quite trivial, but were necessary to correctly link LLVM >> libraries with Mesa3D on Windows. >> >> Jose >> > > Are you volontary

Whoops, mailing list headers still broken, sending to the list this time: On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:35 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: >> So adding an option for adding this flag would be great but not changing the >> default. (The flag is interesting because it can

Thanks cedric, I will look into the ways the debug information could be used. However, it seems like i would have to write a piece of code that would successively reduce the conditional predicate in terms of the local and global variables (of the code). I plan to do it like this. Since i am using a runonBasicblock pass, the context information between two basic blocks cannot be shared, since

David Vandevoorde a écrit : > > I don't think those are _good_ reasons though: If one doesn't want a C+ > + function to be inlined, one shouldn't define it inline. > > You must not have written a lot of C++ template then. You don't have the choice in this case, just check your STL header. > > FWIW, I've been involved in a couple of attempts by

Nuno Lopes a écrit : > Hi, > > I have two questions about optimizations performed by llvm. > > Consider these simple functions: > int x(int b) { return b?4:6; } > int y() { return x(0); } > > int x2() { return 5; } > int y2() { return x2(); } > > the optimized bitcode (with clang + opt -std-compiler-opts) is: > define i32 @y(...) nounwind { > entry:

Hello, Cedric > seems that this wasn't a problem. If speed is needed here, we could hash the > string first in a few bin and do the if/then/else in each bin or use a > perfect hash or some hash container. Thanks for the patch. However I have some better solution in the mind, and it will land "really soon" (tm). We can do the the things much better, if we will emit some sort

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: > should be fixed with r60590 (work for me) That seems to have fixed a large amount of those errors (nicely simple fix). I went ahead and termserved into my dev box (I will not be able to get to it for another day or so) and told svn to update, and cmake to make into a new directory, and build it, but it

Anton Korobeynikov a écrit : > Hi, Oscar > >> at all, it would be great if you reflect your changes on the file list >> inside the corresponding CMakeLists.txt when you add, remove or rename > a >> .cpp file. > Isn't is possible for cmake just to glob everything in the corresponding > directory? > Hi, It is possible, but it has some drawback. Mainly, it

OvermindDL1 a écrit : > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:58 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:57 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:52 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> / * snip */ >>>>

Le 06/03/2010 11:43, José Fonseca a écrit : > Attached are two patches with MSVC build enchancements. > > They are quite trivial, but were necessary to correctly link LLVM > libraries with Mesa3D on Windows. > > Jose > > Are you volontary trying to break everyone build (just to build your own project), or have you no idea of the effect of this change:

-------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Mikael Lyngvig" <mikael at lyngvig.org> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] An alternate implementation of exceptions Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 09:53:29 +0200 (CEST) Size: 6388 URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090906/ca20be9e/attachment.eml>

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: > OvermindDL1 a écrit : >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:58 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:57 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:52 PM, OvermindDL1

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Isaac Dupree <ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org> wrote: > On 03/06/10 18:03, OvermindDL1 wrote: >> >> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Isaac Dupree >> <ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org>  wrote: >>> >>> On 03/06/10 17:37, OvermindDL1 wrote: >>>> >>>> Whoops, mailing list headers still broken,

Chris, > Anton, your patch definitely sounds like the right way to go, but > should we apply this patch until its ready? If I won't finish my bits today, I'll surely apply Cedric's patch. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 12:45 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Cédric Venet <cedric.venet at laposte.net> wrote: >> should be fixed with r60590 (work for me) > > That seems to have fixed a large amount of those errors (nicely simple > fix). I went ahead and termserved into my dev box (I will not be able > to get to

Applied: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20080616/063951.html Thanks Cedric! On Jun 20, 2008, at 2:36 PM, Cédric Venet wrote: > Hi, > > Last time patch contained a new file, but it seems this is not > supported so > I attached it here: > Common.vsprops => llvm/win32/ > This allow to set properties (like preprocessor definition) to all the

Cedric is right, Our target, PIC16, is 8-bit and promotion to 32-bit is really bad for us... Now what exactly is going to happen once these attributes are added, depends on the target. For example, in our case, there will be no promotion on the callee side, but the caller will decide if it wants to promote or not... What will happen in general is that front-end (clang and llvm-gcc) will do the

Hi, Oscar > at all, it would be great if you reflect your changes on the file list > inside the corresponding CMakeLists.txt when you add, remove or rename a > .cpp file. Isn't is possible for cmake just to glob everything in the corresponding directory? -- WBR, Anton Korobeynikov

Martinez, Javier E a écrit : > Hello, > > > > The Clang Visual Studio solution was modified yesterday. A reference to > the file clang.vdproj was added but the file does not appear to be in > the repository. Was this file missed during commit? The file is expected > to be in llvm_trunk\clang\ > The file should be in the clang repository, not the llvm one and be