similar to: [LLVMdev] include files

Hi. First of all, excuse me if I do any mistakes, but English is not a language I use very often. I have a data frame with numbers. A small part of the data frame is this: nominal ordinal 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 So, I want to use the gower distance function on these numbers. Here (

Hi all I'm trying to create a new sieve rule. What I would like to do is catch "From" addresses that are equal to the rightpart (hostname) of a message-id. For example: Message-ID: <000d01c9d23a$941a7db0$6400a8c0 at upwabm> From: "Leanne Crabtree" <upwabm at blomberg-co.com> I would like to catch this mail, because it has "upwabm" on the right part

Hello list, have a problem with sieve script. I want to perform an action if an arbitrary headerline contains a defined string. I tried with regex: if header :regex [".*"] ["searchstri.*"] { fileinto "junk"; } This is not working because regex is only used in 2nd argument ["searchstri.*"] In 1st argument [".*"] no regex is used, sieve

Chris Lattner wrote: > > inline IIty operator*() const { return BI; } > > inline IIty operator->() const { return operator*(); } > > > > So operator* works as if value_type is Instruction*, but operator-> works > > as if value_type is Instruction. Hmm ;-) > > Yeah, fishy huh? :) Yea, a bit. I've decided that before changing that I'd better

Hello, Is there an iterator to iterate over a "range" of instructions in a Function? "range" meaning from an instruction::iterator up to an other instruction::iterator which either: - point to instructions in the same basic block (the first one first, second one second) - point to instructions in different basic block (the BB of the first dominate the BB of the second, and

Within a basic block this is just normal iterator usage/manipulation: for (instr : llvm::make_range(FromInstruction.getIterator(), ToInstruction.getIterator())) { ... } Use std::next() on ToInstruction.getIterator() if you want it included. - Matthias > On Apr 9, 2018, at 10:04 AM, Alexandre Isoard via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello, > > Is there

Please tell me whether the following implementation is correct..... My target supports 64 bit mask means immediate(0-2^63) I have implemented it but i dont know whether its correct or not. Please see the changes below that i have made in x86isellowering.cpp static SDValue lower2048BitVectorShuffle(const SDLoc &DL, ArrayRef<int> Mask, MVT VT,

Hi, Can i "group by" e-mails based on custom header in imap? According to my experience if i use "XX UID SEARCH INTHREAD REFS HEADER myheader myvalue" i receive? emails UID gathers by HEADER+VALUE, but in this way i need to fetch all emails using several imap SEARCH. Has dovecot any features that would help me do this? Thank you!! -------------- next part -------------- An

We've upgraded to llvm 2.4 and we're hitting an assert in SCEV: llvm/include/llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolutionExpressions.h:669: RetVal llvm::SCEVVisitor<SC, RetVal>::visitCouldNotCompute(llvm::SCEVCouldNotCompute*) [with SC = llvm::SCEVExpander, RetVal = llvm::Value*]: Assertion `0 && "Invalid use of SCEVCouldNotCompute!"' failed. This happens in

Hi, Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: Gurunath Kadam via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Date: 11/27/2016 7:49 PM (GMT-06:00) To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: [llvm-dev] LLVM Pass for Instructions in Function (error Hi, Please find the embedded code. Also you may follow

David Greene wrote: > We've upgraded to llvm 2.4 and we're hitting an assert in SCEV: > > llvm/include/llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolutionExpressions.h:669: RetVal > llvm::SCEVVisitor<SC, > RetVal>::visitCouldNotCompute(llvm::SCEVCouldNotCompute*) [with SC = > llvm::SCEVExpander, RetVal = llvm::Value*]: Assertion `0 && "Invalid use of >

On Friday 27 February 2009 00:50, Nick Lewycky wrote: > David Greene wrote: > > We've upgraded to llvm 2.4 and we're hitting an assert in SCEV: > > > > llvm/include/llvm/Analysis/ScalarEvolutionExpressions.h:669: RetVal > > llvm::SCEVVisitor<SC, > > RetVal>::visitCouldNotCompute(llvm::SCEVCouldNotCompute*) [with SC = > > llvm::SCEVExpander,

Hi Sanjoy, the first and last patches look good (except that you didn't add any tests for the auto-upgrade functionality). Comments on the other two below. > Attached patches split init.trampoline into adjust.trampoline and > init.trampoline, like in gcc. > > As mentioned in the previous mail, I've not made a documentation > patch, since I'm not sure about what the

On 12/02/2011 06:32 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 17:07 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 11/23/2011 05:52 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 21:22 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: >>>>>> > Tobias, >>>>>> > >>>>>>

Hi! Attached patches split init.trampoline into adjust.trampoline and init.trampoline, like in gcc. As mentioned in the previous mail, I've not made a documentation patch, since I'm not sure about what the documented semantics of llvm.adjust.trampoline should be. Thanks! -- Sanjoy Das http://playingwithpointers.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was

> On Nov 27, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Gurunath Kadam via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Sandeep, > > Thanks. > > One question about: > > Value* AddrPointer = Inst->getIperand(0); > > So this works for LVALUE(S) i.e. in my case pointer on LHS of '='. I cannot find anything online about getloperand online. > > For reference

Hello friends. I have a softswitch in which I cannot create a list of blocked source numbers; So, I have thought to use Asterisk and return a 302 message when the number can make the call, my dialplan is as follows: [from-external]   exten => _AX.,1,Verbose(=======> ${CALLERID(num)} to ${EXTEN})    same =>      n,Set(MYDESTINY=${REPLACE(${EXTEN},A,)})    same =>     

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote: > Yea, I've noticed that. However, it looks like inst_iterator is iterator over > pointers. Oh, wait a minite, that's the current code: > > inline IIty operator*() const { return BI; } > inline IIty operator->() const { return operator*(); } > > So operator* works as if value_type is Instruction*, but operator->

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > Yeah, fishy huh? :) > > Yea, a bit. I've decided that before changing that I'd better find other > problems, if any, so I run inst_iterator via checks provided by > Boost.Iterators. > > First problem is that inst_iterator (and actually InstIterator class template) > is not Assignable, because it has a reference data

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > and since result of *it is considered to be rvalue it can't be accepted > > by this operator. The complete discussion is in > > > > http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/n1385.htm > > > > I'd suggest to apply the following patch which makes operator* return >