similar to: [LLVMdev] Unpacked Structures within Packed Structures

I also saw this issue before. Llvm seems have trouble returning general struct values from functions. One easy workaround is to use packed struct type. Hope this helps. -Peng On Sunday, December 30, 2012, edA-qa mort-ora-y wrote: > I'm having an issue where a certain set of types and insert/extractvalue > are producing the incorrect values. It appears as though extractvalue >

I'm having an issue where a certain set of types and insert/extractvalue are producing the incorrect values. It appears as though extractvalue getting my sub-structure is not getting the correct data. I have these types: %outer = type { i32, %inner, i1 } %inner = type { double, i32 } The trouble is that when I have a value of type %outer then proceed to extract the components of the

Hello, LLVMers. I ran a simple code twice with a very slight modification and found something interesting. I ran this first: ///////////////////////HL source code//////////////////////// unsigned foo() { unsigned i,j; unsigned sum = 0; for (i=0; i<10; i++) { sum += i; for (j=0; j<3; j++) sum += 2; } return sum; }

I find that because R functions are call by value, and because there are no pointer or reference types (a la C++), I am making fairly heavy use of lexical scoping to modify variables. E.g. outer <- function() { m <- matrix(0, 2, 2) inner <- function() { m[2,2] <<- 3 ... } } I am not too pleased with this, as it violates basic rules of structured programming, namely

I can confirm that if I generate the value directly (not via a return) then the expected values are extracted from the structure. So it is perhaps a return value issue. On 30/12/12 19:04, Peng Cheng wrote: > I also saw this issue before. Llvm seems have trouble returning general > struct values from functions. One easy workaround is to use packed > struct type. > > Hope this

On Dec 6, 2006, at 1:58 PM, Andrew Lenharth wrote: > The attached patch (gcc.patch) implements the gcc portion of packed > types. I have only tested this on a few examples, so I may be missing > some type conversions somewhere. > > The gcc patch requires llvm_extra.patch, not included in the > previous emails. > > Andrew > <llvm_extra.patch> llvm_extra.patch

Dear list, I have a problem with nested functions and I don't manage to get it solved. I know I should be looking in environments, and I have tried a lot, but it keeps on erroring. An easy version of the problem is as follows: innerfunction<-function() { print(paste(a, " from inner function")) print(paste(b, " from inner function")) setwd(wd) }

Hi All, I've been using the great file-attr-restore script with rsync to get around problems with uid's on a portable hard drive... It's the perfect solution for me. (for those that haven't seen it,you can get it here: http://samba.org/ftp/unpacked/rsync/support/file-attr-restore ) Anyway, I found a small bug in the script. file-attr-restore fails for file names with dollar

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote: > LLVMers, > > The 2.5 pre-release2 is finally available for testing: > http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/ > > If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release. > Please do the following: > > 1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or use

On 12/8/06, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > This patch isn't sufficient for two reasons: 1) it will turn structs that > don't need to be packed into packed llvm structs. 2) it won't turn some > that should be packed llvm structs into packed structs (e.g. strange ABI > considerations force a field to be unaligned, not an attribute at the source >

I was looking at the ClassTemplatePartialSpecializationDecl::getInstantiatedFromMember documentation, in the included example it says: "(..) the instantiation of Outer<float>::Inner<int*> will end up instantiating the partial specialization Outer<float>::Inner<U*> (...)". To understand the concept better, I dumped the AST for the following code:

The attached patch (gcc.patch) implements the gcc portion of packed types. I have only tested this on a few examples, so I may be missing some type conversions somewhere. The gcc patch requires llvm_extra.patch, not included in the previous emails. Andrew -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: llvm_extra.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1677 bytes

LLVMers, The 2.5 pre-release2 is finally available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/ If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release. Please do the following: 1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or use llvm-gcc binary (please compile llvm-gcc with fortran if you can). 2) Run make check, send me the testrun.log 3) Run

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Matthias Wendel [mailto:office at matthiaswendel.de] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. Januar 2008 13:06 An: 'r-help-bounces at r-project.org' Cc: 'Gabor Grothendieck' Betreff: AW: [R] subsetting Thank you, Gabor, for this clarificaton. This is very helpful f?r me. Matthias -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Gabor Grothendieck

Hi Reid, I've been working on the outlining code and have a prototype that produces what I want for a simple case. Now I'm thinking about the heuristics for recognizing the various logical pieces for C++ exception handling code and removing them once they’ve been cloned. I've been working from various comments you've made earlier in this thread, and I'd like to run something

Currently, Structure layout is left to targets, which implement them according to the ABI of that platform. While this is fine for most structures, it makes packed structures very ugly. All fields in a packed type must be converted to byte arrays with casts to access fields, which bloats accesses and obsfucates the types. First class support for packed types would clean up the generated code

On Dec 6, 2006, at 10:44 AM, Andrew Lenharth wrote: > Currently, Structure layout is left to targets, which implement them > according to the ABI of that platform. While this is fine for most > structures, it makes packed structures very ugly. All fields in a > packed type must be converted to byte arrays with casts to access > fields, which bloats accesses and obsfucates the

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 20:35:35 -0500 "Patrick Meredith" <pmeredit at uiuc.edu> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Cohen" <jeffc at jolt-lang.org> > To: <LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 7:35 PM > Subject: [LLVMdev] How to handle nested procedures? > > > > How would following Pascal

Hi I am trying to use nlm with an additional call to nlm within the function but after the first pass, the parameters to the outer call are being passed to the inner call. The inner call is a very trivial problem. ie: test.outer<-function(param.outer){ slope<-nlm(test.inner,param.inner) ... loglikelihood<-sum(...) return(-loglikelihood) } and nlm(test.outer,param.outer) on the

This is my simple code, my intention is to let the inner function browse the objects in the outer function. ####################### tk1 <- function() { tk2 <- function() { inner <- 3 list2 <- ls() #list objects in fuction tk2 print("**** inner objects ****") print(list2) #list objects in fuction tk1 list_parent <- ls(parent.frame())