similar to: [LLVMdev] Win64 calling convention

Hello > I don't know. I feel reluctant to generate different IRs for Win32 and > for Win64. Unfortunately, you should. Think about differences and between _Complex type and struct {double, double}. >From LLVM's point of view these are same types, however many ABIs have special rules for passing / returning _Complex, this is possible to handle in frontend only. > Since the C

Thanks, Anton! I didn't know about exceptions like _Complex that you mentioned. The only way to support them is to place the burden of correct parameter passing on the front-end, I understand that now. So, today I created a new transformation pass that makes sure that LLVM IR, which works alright with the default Win32 calling conventions, also plays nice with Win64 code within the limited

Functions with __attribute__((fastcall)) pop their arguments and take up to two arguments in ecx and edx. Currently we represent them by just setting the x86_fastcallcc calling convention. The problem is that the ABI has some strange conventions on when a register is used or not. For example: void __attribute__((fastcall)) foo1(int y); will take 'y' in ecx, but struct S1 { int x; };

Hi! I have discovered a problem with LLVM's interpretation of the Win64 calling convention w.r.t. passing of aggregates as arguments. The following code is part of my host application that is compiled with Visual Studio 2005 in 64-bit debug mode. noise4 expects a structure of four floats as its first and only argument, which is - in accordance with the specs of the Win64 calling convention -

Hello > When compiling this module with llc (Intel assembler syntax) I get the > following code. As you can see, the float4 argument is not passed to > the noise-function by pointer. Instead, noise is treated as if it > expected four individual floats as arguments, which are passed in the > registers XMM0-XMM3. That's correct behaviour. ABI under question is C/C++ ABI and it is

Personally, I'd love to see a setup where instead of LLVM implementing each calling convention and ABI hack, we provide a means of actually describing this. Specifically, I'd love to see a design for how to specify in the IR which register(s) (if any register(s)) a particular value should be placed into. Don't get me wrong, I don't have any good ideas about how to do this, I'm

Hola He estado tratando varias formas de colocar el subíndice para los grados de libertad del F test y la expresión adj; y sencillamente no funciona. legend("topright",legend=c(expression('r[adj]=0.40'),expression('F[3,23]=15.43'),expression('P < 0.001')),col=black, bty='n',cex=0.9) Luego al tratar de colocar las cusriva utilizando par(font=3)

Hola Estoy tratando de correr un survival analysis usando un Cox regression model. Tengo una duda respecto a la organizacion del script. Tengo una variable que es -tamano del individuo- y quiero ver si hay diferencia en sobrevivencia respecto a tamano. Como diseno de campo los tamanos fueron ubicados de forma aleatoria en bloques al azar. Cuado planteo el script tengo algo como:

Hi, I am an R newbie and one thing I am having trouble with binding variables that I have created within one data frame into a new data frame when using na.omit(). To illustrate this problem I will give the example I am working on and the approah I have been using:- data.frame1<-filepath.... attach(data.frame1) #create a new variable using a function new.variable<-rep(1,length(weight3))

Hi, I want to declare a function that matches C ABI. Do I need to transform declarations like void @f(%struct.A %a) into void @f(%struct.A* byval %a) myself or LLVM can do it for me? Is this what "ccc" calling convention means? - Paweł -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi - help! I have read through previous threads on the subject of 'byval' e.g. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/llvm-dev/Exact$20meaning$20of$20byval/llvm-dev/cyRZyXcMCNI https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/llvm-dev/$20byval/llvm-dev/uk4uiK93jeM https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/llvm-dev/byval/llvm-dev/46Tv0lSRwBg and read through code

> Do all tests need it? Align is just for non-default alignment (> align(1)) so it may be OK for the tests to omit it & it's probably not right to /require/ an align attribute on a byval parameter. I've had to fix some of the tests which checked that the right alignment was applied, by looking at the generated asm, but had no "align A" attributes and relied on the

I have three modules: ----------------------------------------------------------------- s1.ll: %0 = type <{ i32, i32 }> define void @s1(%0* byval %myStruct) nounwind { return: ret void } ----------------------------------------------------------------- s2.ll: %0 = type <{ i32, i32 }> define void @s2(%0* byval %myStruct) nounwind { return: ret void }

Hi, In the past months, several options have been presented for making byval (and similar attributes, such as inalloca or sret) work with opaque pointers. The main two I've seen were byval(T) and byval(N) where N is the size of T. They both have their upsides and downsides, for example: byval(T) would be a type-parametric attribute, which, AFAIK, does not already exist and may complicate

Can you provide the summary(m2) results? > -----Original Message----- > From: Simon Pickett [mailto:S.Pickett at exeter.ac.uk] > Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 7:14 AM > To: Doran, Harold > Cc: r-help at stat.math.ethz.ch > Subject: [SPAM] - RE: [R] REML with random slopes and random > intercepts giving strange results - Bayesian Filter detected spam > > Hi again,

Hi Xiaoyi, this looks like a bug to me - please file a bug report. Ciao, Duncan. On 01/11/12 04:35, Guo, Xiaoyi wrote: > I have three modules: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > s1.ll: > > %0 = type <{ i32, i32 }> > > define void @s1(%0* byval %myStruct) nounwind { > return: > ret void > } >

Dear R users, Recent changes to the MuMIn package now means that the model averaging command (model.avg) no longer returns confidence intervals, but instead returns zvalues and corresponding pvalues for fixed effects included in models. Previously I have used this package for model selection/averaging following Greuber et al (2011) where it suggests that one should use confidence intervals from

> Which is how llvm-gcc lowered this. This is a clang bug. > >> Probably all the "alignment" logic needs to be moved upper to frontend... > > There have been several proposals to unify all this argument passing > logic, but most have focused on doing it later in the backend. A long time ago I did this for ppc on llvm-gcc by adding dummy arguments when passing in

Hello, I'm trying to make a function for using wine_get_unix_file_name in VB6 programs. Private Declare Function lstrcpyA Lib "kernel32.dll" (ByVal lpString1 As String, ByVal lpString2 As Long) As Long Public Declare Function GetProcessHeap Lib "kernel32" () As Long Public Declare Function HeapFree Lib "kernel32" (ByVal hHeap As Long, ByVal dwFlags As

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Stuart Hastings <stuart at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 9, 2011, at 1:41 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > > [snip] > >> One example is the struct byval. The ARM back-end still doesn't >> support struct byval (maybe now it does, I was away for a while), > > The ARM backend now supports struct byval for APCS.  Extending it to