Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] does TargetRegistry allocate heap memory?"
2010 Feb 24
1
[LLVMdev] getting C backend
Hi!
is there a way to get the c backend using
llvm::TargetRegistry::lookupTarget()?
e.g. llvm::TargetRegistry::lookupTarget("c", error)?
- Jochen
2010 Nov 26
3
[LLVMdev] request for windows unicode support
On 25.11.2010 23:56, Michael Spencer wrote:
> On Nov 25, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de
> <mailto:j.wilhelmy at arcor.de>> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Of course nobody wants to implement unicode support for windows
>> because windows should support an utf8-locale and windows is obsolete
>> anyway ;-)
>>
>> But
2010 Nov 25
0
[LLVMdev] request for windows unicode support
On Nov 25, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Of course nobody wants to implement unicode support for windows
> because windows should support an utf8-locale and windows is obsolete
> anyway ;-)
>
> But there is a simple solution: use boost::filesystem::path everywhere you
> use file names and paths, for example in
2010 Nov 26
2
[LLVMdev] request for windows unicode support
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:28:17 -0500
Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy
> <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote:
> > No, this post was prompted since I switched to boost::filesystem
> > version 3 in my own code and llvm/clang 2.8
> > was the only lib with no unicode support on windows.
> > Will your
2010 Nov 26
0
[LLVMdev] request for windows unicode support
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote:
> No, this post was prompted since I switched to boost::filesystem version 3
> in my own code and llvm/clang 2.8
> was the only lib with no unicode support on windows.
> Will your code be api compatible to boost::filesystem?
No. boost::filesystem makes extensive use of exceptions, which LLVM is
2010 Jul 20
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] conditional operator
Hello Jochen-
Your expectation is incorrect, I'm afraid. Typically this would be expanded
to something like this:
…
%cmp = …
br i1 %cmp, label %ternary.true, label %ternary.false
ternary.true:
%truevalue = …
br label %ternary.end
ternary.false:
%falsevalue = …
br label %ternary.end
ternary.end:
%value = phi %type [%truevalue, %ternary.true], [%falsevalue,
2010 Mar 03
0
[LLVMdev] folding x * 0 = 0
On 3 March 2010 11:56, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote:
>
> the sin and cos calls are folded, but not the mul by zero.
>
Is x*0 => 0 true if isnan(x)?
And cos(x)*sin(x) makes me desperately want to fold it to sin(2*x)/2,
but I suppose that's not allowed either.
2010 Nov 25
2
[LLVMdev] request for windows unicode support
Hi!
Of course nobody wants to implement unicode support for windows
because windows should support an utf8-locale and windows is obsolete
anyway ;-)
But there is a simple solution: use boost::filesystem::path everywhere you
use file names and paths, for example in clang::FileManager::getFile.
With version 3 opening a file is easy: std::fstream file(path.c_str()).
Internally
2010 Mar 03
5
[LLVMdev] folding x * 0 = 0
Hi!
> sin/cos etc should already be handled by lib/Analysis/ConstantFolding.cpp.
>
Thanks for the hint and it works!
Now I have a new Problem:
I have this function:
float foo(float a, float b)
{
float x = a * b * 0.0f;
return cos(0.5) * sin(0.5) * x;
};
after compiling it with clang (cpp mode) and renaming _ZSt3sinf to sin
and _ZSt3cosf to cos I get the following:
define
2011 May 25
1
[LLVMdev] ms vc 10 warnings
Hi!
when compiling projects using llvm 2.9 and ms vc 10 I get these warnings:
1>e:\Jochen\Lib\lib\include\llvm/Use.h(218): warning C4624:
'llvm::AugmentedUse' : destructor could not be generated because a base
class destructor is inaccessible
1>C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio
10.0\VC\include\stdint.h(72): warning C4005: 'INT8_MIN' : macro redefinition
2011 Dec 29
0
[LLVMdev] InstCombine "pessimizes" trunc i8 to i1?
I think Chris is saying that the and is necessary because with your i1
trunc you're ignoring all of the high bits. The and implements that. If
you don't want this behavior, don't generate the trunc in the first place
and just compare the full width to zero.
Reid
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de>wrote:
>
> >> Hi!
>
2010 Oct 18
3
[LLVMdev] building only libs with cmake
Now I have -DLLVM_INCLUDE_EXAMPLES:BOOL=OFF
but Kaleidoscope is still there and selected for build
(-G "Visual Studio 9 2008")
-Jochen
2011 Feb 18
2
[LLVMdev] Please add .o writer example to next release
Hi!
Is it possible that you add an example how to write a .o with llvm?
Just like examples/ModuleMaker but instead of printing to stdout
writing a .o file as starting point for the new MC functionality.
-Jochen
2011 Feb 17
0
[LLVMdev] bytecode cache
It is possible and, since LLVM doesn't support self-modifying code at the IR level, this should not be particularly difficult. It just hasn't been high on anybody's priority list so far.
--Vikram
Associate Professor, Computer Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
http://llvm.org/~vadve
On Feb 17, 2011, at 12:00 PM, <llvmdev-request at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
2011 Feb 18
0
[LLVMdev] Please add .o writer example to next release
Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> writes:
> Is it possible that you add an example how to write a .o with llvm?
+1
2010 Jun 24
3
[LLVMdev] DataTypes.h for Visual C
Hi!
In DataTypes.h (generated from DataTypes.cmake) there is an extra
code path for Visual C.
This can produce macro redefinitions for INT8_MAX, INT8_MIN etc.
since other headers may also define them. Therefore please
protect the macros like INT8_C etc.
Also it would be nice if the auto-generated HAVE_STDINT_H
and HAVE_INTTYPES_H would be used also for Visual C since it
is possible to add them
2010 Feb 02
0
[LLVMdev] function inlining
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I have a llvm::Module that references an external function
> and a second mdoule that implements the function.
> The implementation consists of only one instruction.
> How can I explicitly inline this function?
>
> -Jochen
>
>
2010 Apr 08
0
[LLVMdev] graph abstraction proposal
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> while trying to use llvm::DominatorTreeBase on a custom graph that
> has nothing to do with llvm::BasicBlock I ran into some difficulties,
> because llvm::DominatorTreeBase calls e.g. getParent()->front()
> directly on the nodes and uses llvm::Inverse which forced me to
>
2010 May 14
0
[LLVMdev] vector optimization
Instcombine does of this, late codegen also does some of it.
-Chris
On May 14, 2010, at 5:58 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Is there a pass that optimizes vector operations?
> If I have for examle a sequence of shufflevector instructions
> that optimizes them?
> (in opencl notation e.g. a.xyzw.wzyx.xxxx -> a.wwww)
>
> -Jochen
2010 Oct 27
0
[LLVMdev] handle error of getPointerToFunction
Can you be more precise about where the error occurs? Depending on
where it is, LLVM may or may not be able to propagate the error
safely.
Reid
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I have this scenario:
> executionEngine->getPointerToFunction fails because a symbol can not be
> resolved.
>
> What can I do to