similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM 3.0 release notes

Internal API changes mentioned the Type system changes twice... merging. It should now read: The biggest and most pervasive change is that the type system has been rewritten: PATypeHolder and OpaqueType are gone, and all APIs deal with Type* instead of const Type*. If you need to create recursive structures, then create a named structure, and use setBody() when all its elements are built. Type

On Nov 28, 2011, at 7:20 AM, Joe Abbey wrote: > Internal API changes mentioned the Type system changes twice... merging. It should now read: > > The biggest and most pervasive change is that the type system has been rewritten: PATypeHolder and OpaqueType are gone, and all APIs deal with Type* instead of const Type*. If you need to create recursive structures, then create a named

Hi Chris, > 3. Clang/dragonegg need to adapt to the new API (help appreciated!) what needs to be done exactly? Ciao, Duncan.

On 25 June 2011 13:00, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: >> 3. Clang/dragonegg need to adapt to the new API (help appreciated!) > > what needs to be done exactly? Background info: http://www.nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/TypeSystemRewrite.txt As I understand it, PATypeHolder, OpaqueType and the Module's TypeSymbolTable are gone. Instead, StructTypes can optionally be

As far as I can tell, when you construct a type using the support library StructType::get, you have to pass in a list of types. How can you make a Recursive type by passing in a pointer to the type you are constucting. An example where something really simple like the line below was output would be perfect. %struct.linked_list = type { %struct.linked_list*, %sbyte* } Thanks for any help,

On Mon, 7 Mar 2005, John Carrino wrote: > As far as I can tell, when you construct a type using the support > library StructType::get, you have to pass in a list of types. How can > you make a Recursive type by passing in a pointer to the type you are > constucting. > > An example where something really simple like the line below was output > would be perfect. > >

>> An example where something really simple like the line below was output >> would be perfect. >> >> %struct.linked_list = type { %struct.linked_list*, %sbyte* } > > Use something like this: > > PATypeHolder StructTy = OpaqueType::get(); > std::vector<const Type*> Elts; > Elts.push_back(PointerType::get(StructTy)); >

Thanks for the information I am trying to use one of your examples for recursive data structures: ========================= PATypeHolder StructTy = OpaqueType::get(); std::vector<const Type*> Elts; Elts.push_back(PointerType::get(StructTy)); Elts.push_back(PointerType::get(Type::SByteTy)); StructType *NewSTy = StructType::get(Elts); // At this point, NewSTy = "{ opaque*, sbyte*

On 18 July 2011 15:23, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Looks like that break came > from http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=rev&revision=135154 > Judging by this ArrayRef ctor you should be able to simplify those calls by > changing the last two arguments from "&foo, 1" to, simply, "foo". I've done this in r135472. Jay.

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:12:47AM +0100, Jay Foad wrote: > On 18 July 2011 15:23, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > Looks like that break came > > from http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=rev&revision=135154 > > Judging by this ArrayRef ctor you should be able to simplify those calls by > > changing the last two arguments from

Hi, I'm having a play with LLVM to implement a custom language (for my intellectual curiosity only). I'm wondering how, when using IRBuilder, one can can it to emit a recursive type definition? The code for TypeBuilder explicitly states that it doesn't handle recursive types... I'm after being able to emit, programmatically, stuff like the Named Types example in the Language

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote: >>> An example where something really simple like the line below was output >>> would be perfect. >>> >>> %struct.linked_list = type { %struct.linked_list*, %sbyte* } >> >> Use something like this: >> >> PATypeHolder StructTy = OpaqueType::get(); >> std::vector<const

On Jun 12, 2008, at 13:25, Hendrik Boom wrote: > So it appears that types are processed for identity the moment they > are made during parse tree construction? Yes. > This means that a type has to be completely known on creation. Yes. > Presumably there's some mechanism tor a type that isn't completely > known yet -- or is thet avoided by having a type

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, xavier wrote: > Thanks for the information > I am trying to use one of your examples for recursive data structures: > > ========================= > PATypeHolder StructTy = OpaqueType::get(); > std::vector<const Type*> Elts; > Elts.push_back(PointerType::get(StructTy)); > Elts.push_back(PointerType::get(Type::SByteTy)); > StructType *NewSTy =

Hello, I'm trying to translate part of Java code in LLVM code. I have some problems with the "opaque type", I think because I did not understand how to use. So, the java code is: int[] ai; .... ai = new int[1]; I am using LLVM API in this way: //I create a pointer of Opaque type, because I don't know yet the array size! OpaqueType* ot = OpaqueType::get(); AllocaInst*

>> >> I think I may have found an exception to this -- the API seems to >> require me to have all the fields for a struct ready before I >> construct the struct. I don't have the ability to make a struct >> type, use it to declare some variables, and still contribute fields >> to it during the rest of the compilation. >> >> Is there a

On Fri, October 3, 2008 9:10 am, David Greene wrote: > On Thursday 02 October 2008 19:32, Dan Gohman wrote: > >> Looking at your dump() output above, it looks like the pre-selection >> loads have multiple uses, so even though you've managed to match a >> larger pattern that incorporates them, they still need to exist to >> satisfy some other users. > > Yes,

On Thursday 02 October 2008 19:32, Dan Gohman wrote: > Looking at your dump() output above, it looks like the pre-selection > loads have multiple uses, so even though you've managed to match a > larger pattern that incorporates them, they still need to exist to > satisfy some other users. Yes, I looked at that too. It looks like these other uses end up being chains to

Hi Jay, > As I understand it, PATypeHolder, OpaqueType and the Module's > TypeSymbolTable are gone. Instead, StructTypes can optionally be > named, and if they are then: > > - they use name equivalence instead of structural equivalence. > - you can create them without any fields, and then add the fields > later when the struct is complete. I find this distinction between

I am following the code of the project https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/java/trunk/lib/Compiler/Resolver.cpp, But some class/function of it is not present in my source code due to replacement of this function in newer llvm verion. Can someone please suggest me the alternative approach of these function in latest llvm version. Here are those classes and functions : 1) PATypeHolder 2)