similar to: [LLVMdev] Extensible Metadata in LLVM IR

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: > http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt Here is partial initial implementation. Thoughts ? - Devang -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mdn.diff Type: application/octet-stream

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Devang Patel <devang.patel at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: >> http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt > > Here is partial initial implementation. > Thoughts ? setHasMetadata

Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt -Chris

I've got a suggestion for a refinement: Right now, we have classes like DILocation that wrap an MDNode* to provide more convenient access to it. It would be more convenient for users if instead of MDNode *DbgInfo = Inst->getMD(MDKind::DbgTag); Inst2->setMD(MDKind::DbgTag, DbgInfo); they could write: DILocation DbgInfo = Inst->getMD<DILocation>();

Hi Chris, > Devang and I wrote up a description of this new LLVM 2.7 feature here: > http://blog.llvm.org/2010/04/extensible-metadata-in-llvm-ir.html That's useful but it would be great if you could include programming idioms/examples showing to attach metadata and how to query it later. For example, it wasn't obvious to me that you can't attach an MDString to an instruction

On Sep 11, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: > http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt The document mentions "instructions" a lot. We'll want to be able to apply metadata to ConstantExprs as well at least, if not also Arguments (think noalias) and other stuff, so it seems best to just

Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Sep 11, 2009, at 7:17 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > >> Dan Gohman wrote: >>> On Sep 11, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >>>> Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: >>>> http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt >>> The document mentions "instructions" a lot.

On Sep 11, 2009, at 7:17 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Dan Gohman wrote: >> On Sep 11, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >>> Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: >>> http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt >> The document mentions "instructions" a lot. We'll want to be able to >> apply metadata to

Dan Gohman wrote: > On Sep 11, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > >> Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: >> http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt > > The document mentions "instructions" a lot. We'll want to be able to > apply metadata to ConstantExprs as well at least, if not also Arguments >

On Sep 11, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > > On Sep 11, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > >> Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: >> http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtensibleMetadata.txt > > The document mentions "instructions" a lot. We'll want to be able to > apply metadata to ConstantExprs as well at

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > The demand for metadata is even greater in non-C languages. For high level > scripting languages like python, it would be nice to be able to do static type > inference and annotate various pointers with type class information ("this is > a python string object", "this is a

Has any progress been made on structured exception handling on Windows? I saw a post by Duncan Sands back in September 2008, but haven't seen anything since. I'm trying to generate code to run on Windows, but would really prefer not to ship libgcc... -- Joe Ranieri

On Jun 3, 2009, at 18:50, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Joe Ranieri<joe at alacatialabs.com> > wrote: >> Has any progress been made on structured exception handling on >> Windows? I saw a post by Duncan Sands back in September 2008, but >> haven't seen anything since. I'm trying to generate code to run on >> Windows, but would

On Sep 11, 2009, at 4:47 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Sep 11, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > > >> >> >> On Sep 11, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Devang's work on debug info prompted this, thoughts welcome: >>> >>>

On Jan 27, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Devang Patel <dpatel at apple.com> wrote: > [ removing cfe-dev from the cc list ] > > On Jan 27, 2012, at 1:31 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > >> On Jan 27, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Devang Patel wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: >>> >>>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Devang

On Jan 30, 2012, at 10:08 AM, Devang Patel wrote: > > On Jan 27, 2012, at 5:00 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > >> Not all of these are miscompiles, > > None I'd say, may be TBAA. Then you missed value ranges and fpaccuracy. Anyway, here are some examples of optimizations which aren't implemented yet, but which have been seriously considered: metadata to mark C++ copy

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Joe Ranieri<joe at alacatialabs.com> wrote: > Has any progress been made on structured exception handling on > Windows? I saw a post by Duncan Sands back in September 2008, but > haven't seen anything since. I'm trying to generate code to run on > Windows, but would really prefer not to ship libgcc... I fail to see the connection between

Hi Chris, Thanks. I will see what I can do for this. Junjie On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 19, 2010, at 2:38 PM, Junjie Gu wrote: > >> Many compilers support per-loop pragma, such as loop unrolling (ie >> #pragma unroll=2).  Is there any LLVM project/effort going on >> in this area ? What is the expected

On Sep 11, 2009, at 3:23 PM, David Greene wrote: > I have a few questions and comments about Chris' initial proposal as > well. > > - I don't like the separation between "built-in" metadata and > "extended" > metadata. Why not make all metadata use the RegisterMDKind > interface and > just have the LLVM libraries do it automatically for

On Jan 27, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Devang Patel wrote: > [ removing cfe-dev from the cc list ] > > On Jan 27, 2012, at 1:31 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > >> On Jan 27, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Devang Patel wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: >>> >>>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Devang Patel wrote: