similar to: [LLVMdev] Microsoft constructors implementation problem.

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all. > > I am working on constructors implementation for MS ABI. Itanium ABI has > 2 constructor types - base & complete. MS ABI has only 1 type. > How it works I'll show on example. > class first { > public: >   virtual void g(){} > }; > > class second : public virtual first

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:41 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: > On 24/10/12 17:03, r4start wrote: >> >> On 23/10/12 01:30, Michael Spencer wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:53 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 20/10/12 03:15, Michael Spencer wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On

On 23/10/12 01:30, Michael Spencer wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:53 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >> On 20/10/12 03:15, Michael Spencer wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:55 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi all. >>>> >>>> While compiling next code >>>> @A = weak unnamed_addr constant {

On 03/11/12 01:37, Michael Spencer wrote: > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 9:41 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >> On 24/10/12 17:03, r4start wrote: >>> On 23/10/12 01:30, Michael Spencer wrote: >>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:53 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 20/10/12 03:15, Michael Spencer wrote:

On 24/10/12 17:03, r4start wrote: > On 23/10/12 01:30, Michael Spencer wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:53 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 20/10/12 03:15, Michael Spencer wrote: >>>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:55 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Hi all. >>>>> >>>>> While

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:53 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: > On 20/10/12 03:15, Michael Spencer wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:55 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all. >>> >>> While compiling next code >>> @A = weak unnamed_addr constant { i32, i32, i32 } { i32 0, i32 0, i32 0

On 20/10/12 03:15, Michael Spencer wrote: > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:55 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi all. >> >> While compiling next code >> @A = weak unnamed_addr constant { i32, i32, i32 } { i32 0, i32 0, i32 0 }, >> section ".data" >> was discovered that llc ignores weak linkage if we emit it in COFF object. >>

Hi! I have another question. If ctor was called from other ctor then additional parameter must be equal 0 otherwise it`s equal 1. How can I determine who call constructor? - Dmitry.

Hi all. While compiling next code @A = weak unnamed_addr constant { i32, i32, i32 } { i32 0, i32 0, i32 0 }, section ".data" was discovered that llc ignores weak linkage if we emit it in COFF object. Attached patch solves this problem, please review. I found some similar tests in test/Objects/Inputs. Should I do something like trivial.ll checking or there is a better way to check

On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:55 AM, r4start <r4start at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all. > > While compiling next code > @A = weak unnamed_addr constant { i32, i32, i32 } { i32 0, i32 0, i32 0 }, > section ".data" > was discovered that llc ignores weak linkage if we emit it in COFF object. > Attached patch solves this problem, please review. > > I found some

On Mar 5, 2012, at 12:40 AM, r4start wrote: > I have another question. > If ctor was called from other ctor then additional parameter must be > equal 0 otherwise it`s equal 1. The rule isn't "Is this constructor being called from another constructor?", it's "Is this constructor being used to initialize a base subobject?". That's equivalent to the Itanium

Hi all! I have problem with eliminating of unreachable basic block in function code. This block must be called from other place through address in global constant, it has no predecessors. When I build object file this address = 1. I found that 1 inserts only if block was elimanted. Is it normal, when block eliminates even if some constant have address of this block? Can I disable this

I think it'd be reasonable to at least figure out a good way to do type references consistently across the two schemes, but I'm OK with the idea of having a blob of opaque type information for different debug info formats, created by frontends (& don't mind if the library for building that blob live in LLVM or Clang for now - the DWARF one at least would probably live in LLVM

Signed-off-by: Scott Seago <sseago at redhat.com> --- AUTHORS | 17 ++++++ README | 10 +++ conf/ovirt-agent | 12 ++++ conf/ovirt-db-omatic | 12 ++++ conf/ovirt-host-browser | 12 ++++