similar to: [LLVMdev] Compiling Stacker compiler

While it is great that LLVM has an IR Verifier, its a little troublesome to use because it separates the point of detection from the source of the problem. That is, the verifier gets run on a module or function after its been built. By that point, the compiler's state has moved past the point at which the error was placed into the module or function. Trying to track down the source of the

Valery, That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Reid. Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > Hi LLVMers, > > the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible > optimizations are really invoked. > > Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3 >

On second thought, the makefiles don't (easily) allow this do they? You can only build one program per directory. Were you suggesting that you wanted me to move the entire directories under a "small examples" directory? Reid. Chris Lattner wrote: > On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > > >>That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > On second thought, the makefiles don't (easily) allow this do they? You can > only build one program per directory. Were you suggesting that you wanted me to > move the entire directories under a "small examples" directory? You're right. The simples way to do this would be to have: projects/ SmallExamples/

I have a module having the blockaddress instruction. When I link it into another module and delete the original, blockaddress disappears and is replaced by inttoptr (i32 1 to i8*). Please compile and run the attached program to see the demo of this problem. Right after linking modules, blockaddress still exists: @switch.bbs = internal global [3 x i8*] [i8* blockaddress(@my_func,

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs > repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Here's an idea: how about we take the ModuleMaker, Valery's previous example, and this one and put them all in one "small examples" project? -Chris > Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > >

Hi all, In several of the transformations I'm working on I need to embed the logical equivalent of puts/printf/etc. calls inline with code. I am having some difficulties getting the transformation code right. As I understand it, I should be creating a ConstantArray based on the string (in this case I'm taking an instruction, 'disassembling' it to an ostringstream then turning

On Apr 29, 2008, at 1:27 AM, Gabor Greif wrote: > Hi all, > > I have reported more than enough about the space savings achieved > and the associated costs, here comes the current patch for review. > > Since this one is substantially smaller than the previous one, I did > not cut it in pieces. The front part is about headers and the rest > the .cpp and other files. Hi

Something must be wrong, more probable on my side. So the C source code is unchanged, I just did another experiment to first extract all the GEPs in the code, and call AliasAnalysis::alias on each pair of GEPs. Here is the code: AliasAnalysis &AA = getAnalysis<AliasAnalysis>(); TargetData &TD = getAnalysis<TargetData>(); for (Module::iterator it = M.begin();

Hi Lalo, Its been a while since I've had a Stacker question! The answer is in the StackerCompiler::handle_while function in StackerCompiler.cpp in projects/Stacker/lib/compiler. Apparently the control value is only examined (not popped) for the "WHILE" operator. Take for example the prime.st sample program. The first thing it does is process the arguments with a WHILE loop:

Hi all, with r49277 I have checked in the API changes for the first wave of modifications related to the size reduction of Use objects. Several creation methods take the place of the previously used "operator new". I have changed the llvm-gcc4.2 and clang projects, but if you have any llvm projects that tracks the SVN trunk of the API you will have to upgrade. in *tcsh* I have used

Probably your g++ compiles x86_64 binary by default, but i686 dylib is supplied? Try: g++ -m32 e.cpp /Developer/Platforms/iPhoneOS.platform/Developer/usr/llvm-gcc-4.2/libexec/gcc/i686-apple-darwin10/4.2.1/libllvmgcc.dylib - D. 2012/1/22 Arpan Sen <arpansen at gmail.com>: > Hi, > > I am trying to use some LLVM API in my C++ code, and I end up getting linker > errors. I am

Hi, I am trying to use some LLVM API in my C++ code, and I end up getting linker errors. I am working on Apple MacOSX Lion. Using g++ for the compile. It is the CreateGlobalStringPtr which is throwing the error. This is LLVM 3.0. Here's the codeI am trying to use some LLVM API in my C++ code, and I end up getting linker errors. I am working on Apple MacOSX Lion. Using g++ for the compile. It

I am new to LLVM and couldn't find any llvm-user list, so I am posting my user question here, sorry. I am trying to create a simple "puts" call accepting the static string, with the code below. The last line (CallInst::Create) fails with an assert: "Calling a function with a bad signature!" Because the type of function is void(u8*) and the argument supplied is:

libswfdec/swfdec_as_interpret.c | 51 + test/trace/Makefile.am | 16 test/trace/chartoascii-4.swf |binary test/trace/chartoascii-4.swf.trace | 7 test/trace/chartoascii-5.swf |binary test/trace/chartoascii-5.swf.trace | 1011 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ test/trace/chartoascii-6.swf |binary test/trace/chartoascii-6.swf.trace | 1008

Dear All I'm making an instrumentation pass. The pass is supposed to modify the given IR in a specefic way. One of the required modifications is to insert a call to a function at a specific location. This is the signature of the called function: void myclass::foo(Function *f, BasicBlock* b) This function's prototype is in an foofile.h file in include/llvm And the function

Hi all, I am new to LLVM, and I am learning how to use LLVM for profiling. I need to pass an array to an external method, and insert a call instruction to the method in the code. After reading a few source files, I've tried using GetElementPtrInst to pass an array, but it fails at llvm::GetElementPtrInst::hasAllZeroIndices() const + 0 std::vector<Value*> Args(1);

On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 19:47 -0500, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Paul wrote: > > I'm trying to pass an array pointer to my run-time generated module, and > > after a long time of searching for the answer, the only thing I got was > > a headache. Basically I have a few arrays (few megabytes which will > > sometimes be accessed as 8 / 16 / 32 / 64 bit

On Aug 19, 2013, at 14:26 , chentommy <baiypwup at hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello LLVMDev List, > > > It's my first time sending a message to the List - I have been working on a tool for my research project using LLVM. Thanks for your awesome work! > > I have come across some bytecode like the following with an GetElementPtr instruction in brackets: > >

Hello LLVMDev List, It's my first time sending a message to the List - I have been working on a tool for my research project using LLVM. Thanks for your awesome work! I have come across some bytecode like the following with an GetElementPtr instruction in brackets: Bytecode:%3 = call i32 @_Z4funcPKc(i8* getelementptr inbounds ([5 x i8]* @.str2, i32 0, i32 0)) C++ code:func("bleh");