similar to: [LLVMdev] aborting on invalid code

On Oct 13, 2008, at 10:05 AM, Dan Gohman wrote: > On Sat, October 11, 2008 3:13 pm, Chris Lattner wrote: >> [...] Sending invalid >> code into the backend is violating a very important invariant in the >> API. I don't see how it would be any different then passing in a >> null >> pointer or garbage pointer into an API that would then bus error. > >

Please use subjects that have something to do with the content, this discussion has nothing to do with 2.4 On Oct 11, 2008, at 1:01 PM, OvermindDL1 wrote: > On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Kenneth Boyd <zaimoni at zaimoni.com> > wrote: >> /* snip */ > > Actually, my biggest issue with llvm (which highly impacts testing as > well) is the use of abort()... > I

On 6/18/07, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Sandro Magi wrote: > > Ok, so if I needed very precise control over the allocation of memory, > > then I should avoid using integers with bit widths larger than 64 bits > > (or perhaps 128)? Is there a hard rule for an integer being stack > > allocated, ie. one that doesn't depend on

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Sandro Magi wrote: > Generated code. So the memory used for the integer at program runtime > is inlined into the allocation point then? So if I define a local > variable of type 'i1024', it will allocate a block of 1024 bits on the > stack, if I define a struct with an i1024, it will be in the struct > itself, etc. Yes, exactly. > Is there anyone

Chris Lattner wrote: >On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Sandro Magi wrote: > > >>Generated code. So the memory used for the integer at program runtime >>is inlined into the allocation point then? So if I define a local >>variable of type 'i1024', it will allocate a block of 1024 bits on the >>stack, if I define a struct with an i1024, it will be in the struct

On Oct 13, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >> Currently there no way to recover if the IR contains some >> construct that codegen can't handle. This is unfortunate for some >> applications. > > I completely agree, but these should not be fixed with exceptions: > this should be fixed by adding a direct failure reporting mechanism. > > -Chris

Hi, I know there's been some talk about bignums already, this is similar to it, but not exactly the same. I'm currently using LLVM for my master thesis. The goal is to make a compiler for zero-knowledge proofs of knowledge protocols. This compiler should target embedded devices. There's a language called the protocol implementation language in which these protocols should be

I do not have a strong opinion on the naming of the various size functions, or on how to deal with APInt's of sizes that are not multiples of a byte. I do think loading and storing more bytes than necessary is generally a bad idea, especially if you're getting uninitialized bits. (If you incorrectly cross a page boundary, you might fault, for one thing. Watch out for packed

On Oct 13, 2008, at 10:56 AM, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > Andrew and I (and another faculty member here) are working on software > recovery techniques for run-time errors that would otherwise be fatal, > so I am curious about this answer. Why do you think these cases > should not be fixed with exceptions? What if a client wants to > *recover* in some manner, e.g., by emulating missing

On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Kenneth Boyd <zaimoni at zaimoni.com> wrote: > /* snip */ Actually, my biggest issue with llvm (which highly impacts testing as well) is the use of abort(), which I have resolved in my local copy by just searching for the full word "abort" everywhere and just replacing them with exceptions that relay what happened. Reason this is my biggest

Adding llvm-dev to this thread as this is probably worth wider discussion. See the original patch email below. If you're sending just code-related comments, consider dropping llvm-dev. On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com>wrote: > Hello all! I've been busy working on a somewhat larger patch than usual, > and Duncan indicated I should get

On Oct 13, 2008, at 1:07 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > Exceptions have a high cost in terms of code size, binary size, and > even a bit of execution time. Also, they don't magically make the > code safe from any error: code has to be designed specifically to use > RAII and other techniques to handle exceptions properly. Reading a C+ > + trade magazines/books about EH topics

On Oct 13, 2008, at 1:10 PM, Robert Zeh wrote: > > On Oct 13, 2008, at 1:07 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >> Exceptions have a high cost in terms of code size, binary size, and >> even a bit of execution time. Also, they don't magically make the >> code safe from any error: code has to be designed specifically to use >> RAII and other techniques to handle

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Sandro Magi wrote: > Ok, so if I needed very precise control over the allocation of memory, > then I should avoid using integers with bit widths larger than 64 bits > (or perhaps 128)? Is there a hard rule for an integer being stack > allocated, ie. one that doesn't depend on the current implementation > details? In the generated code, or in the compiler

Hi All: I am an newcomer,I have a question that the lastest version of samba can suport the SMB3.0 ? Can suport SMB3.0's persistent File Handles feature? I am test the SMB3.0 Transparent Failover in winserver 2012. Docs says that Failover need client and server all surport SMB3.0. Can I user samba instead of SMB server? Thanks Jiademing

Ok, so if I needed very precise control over the allocation of memory, then I should avoid using integers with bit widths larger than 64 bits (or perhaps 128)? Is there a hard rule for an integer being stack allocated, ie. one that doesn't depend on the current implementation details? Sandro On 6/18/07, Reid Spencer <rspencer at reidspencer.com> wrote: > Sandro Magi wrote: > >

Hello, I'm new to LLVM but I see lots of potential on it for something that I'm working on. I have a few questions about it: 1) I know there is a MSIL backend which is still at an experimental phase. When will it be ready? The same question for the MIPS backend. 2) Is there any plan or work being done to implement a Java backend? 3) I saw the passes feature. I think this can be very

> As an optimization for shallow nested functions (e.g., 3 levels or less), > it seems to me you could just avoid the stack walking entirely and add > $k-1$ arguments to each function at level $k$, i.e., at most 2 arguments > in all. This may even be an easy first implementation. I use this method with filtering unused in nested function args and local vars in my YAFL frontend

Hi, windows 7 supports smb3. If centos's samba server suport smb3, how to make windows 10 support smb3 too? Thanks! Regards Andrew At 2019-09-13 15:47:34, "John Hodrien" <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk> wrote: >On Thu, 12 Sep 2019, me at tdiehl.org wrote: > >> Why? This is NOT necessary for win 10 to work. I do not even know if it will >> work with

Hi * users, I want to know if STUN suport is available with Asterisk. Kindly let me know. I have posted this also in DEV list but none replied to me. thanks, Somesh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20050808/e26855c9/attachment.htm