similar to: [LLVMdev] [PATCH] Coding standards: don't use ``inline`` when defining a function in a class definition

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Coding standards: don't use ``inline`` when defining a function in a class definition"

2013 Feb 04
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Coding standards: don't use ``inline`` when defining a function in a class definition
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > This came up on IRC in context of r173842, and it was suggested to > codify this unspoken rule. > > Current practice is not to use 'inline' in: > > class Foo { > public: > inline void bar() { > // ... > } > }; Ping. This patch is
2013 Feb 04
1
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Coding standards: don't use ``inline`` when defining a function in a class definition
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > This came up on IRC in context of r173842, and it was suggested to > > codify this unspoken rule. > > > > Current practice is not to use 'inline' in:
2013 Jan 16
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] A "very verbose" mode for FileCheck
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >>>
2012 Dec 05
3
[LLVMdev] Converting documentation to rst
Hello, JFYI so that no work will be duplicated. My colleagues and I will take care of converting the rest of the documentation to rst. Dmitri -- main(i,j){for(i=2;;i++){for(j=2;j<i;j++){if(!(i%j)){j=0;break;}}if (j){printf("%d\n",i);}}} /*Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>*/
2013 Jan 16
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] A "very verbose" mode for FileCheck
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:23 AM, Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >>>>
2013 Jan 16
3
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] A "very verbose" mode for FileCheck
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> When someone breaks a FileCheck-based test on some buildbot, sometimes >> it may not be obvious *why* did it fail. If the failure can not be >> reproduced locally, it can
2013 Jan 17
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] A "very verbose" mode for FileCheck
Note that as far as places to put temporary files, the right place to put them is alongside the other test outputs in the test output "sandbox" directory. Somewhat orthogonal, but we should also fix up lit to purge those sandboxes before it starts a new test run. - Daniel On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013
2013 Jan 17
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] A "very verbose" mode for FileCheck
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > We have to options: > (a) replace 'FileCheck' with '%FileCheck' in all tests, and teach > 'lit' to replace '%FileCheck' with 'FileCheck --dump-input-on-error'; > > (b) teach 'lit' to replace a plain 'FileCheck'. > > The first approach
2012 Nov 09
3
[LLVMdev] MODULE_CODE_GLOBALVAR error
Hi, I have istalled LLVM 3.1 Release+Asserts build. I was just trying out the hello world sequence of steps in the installation instructions. However when I run lli or llvm-dis I get an error "invalid MODULE_CODE_GLOBALVAR record". I have searched the web and I am not able to fathom what the problem and its fix is. I have GCC 4.6.3 running on a Ubuntu 12.04 LTS x86-64. Please let me
2014 Jan 21
2
[LLVMdev] C++0x Bug in CMake?
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> > wrote: > > Chandler, > > > > I may be doing this wrong, but I'm getting a weird error in building LLVM > > with Clang via CMake. > > I have been debugging a similar issue that I isolated
2013 Jan 16
1
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [PATCH] A "very verbose" mode for FileCheck
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:31 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:23 AM, Evgeniy Stepanov > <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote:
2013 Jan 28
3
[LLVMdev] Running a Local Buildbot
Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> writes: > Also, you don't need to do a 2-step bootstrap to catch warnings from > gcc. You also don't need a debug build, just an optimized one -- > since it is faster to link, and gcc emits more warnings when > optimization is no. Actually, there are cases a debug build catches that an optimized build doesn't because
2013 Jan 16
4
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] A "very verbose" mode for FileCheck
Hello, When someone breaks a FileCheck-based test on some buildbot, sometimes it may not be obvious *why* did it fail. If the failure can not be reproduced locally, it can be very hard to fix. I propose adding a "very verbose" mode to FileCheck. In this mode FileCheck will dump the input file in case of failure. This mode will be enabled by an environment variable
2014 Oct 09
2
[LLVMdev] lld coding style
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: > The lld conventions for ivars is a leading underscore followed by a > lowercase letter. The reserved identifiers are a leading underscore > followed by an uppercase letter. There is no conflict. > And I didn't say that there was. They are *close*. Too close. People make mistakes and get it wrong.
2013 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] Adding a Buildbot Config
Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:07 PM, <dag at cray.com> wrote: >> Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> writes: >> >>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:43 AM, <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: >>>> The document here explains pretty well how to add a buildslave to the >>>> buildbot:
2013 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] Adding a Buildbot Config
Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:43 AM, <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: >> The document here explains pretty well how to add a buildslave to the >> buildbot: >> >> http://llvm.org/docs/HowToAddABuilder.html >> >> However, it's not clear to me how to add a new build config. I would >> like
2012 Dec 06
2
[LLVMdev] Converting documentation to rst
FYI I am bout to convert LangRef. it should be done by the end of today. Please keep me up to date with any work you do on the other documents. -- Sean Silva On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > Thanks for doing this. > > I was planning on finishing these by this weekend. If you are planning > on taking significantly longer than that I
2012 Sep 29
2
[LLVMdev] Letter-spacing in Sphinx CSS?
Hello, Why do we have letter-spacing: -0.01em in the CSS generated by Sphinx? Could we remove that? It makes the main text font look really bad for me (I can attach an image if anyone wishes to take a look). Fonts already have appropriate tracking built-in, so trying to change that, especially without knowing the font name beforehand, is shooting oneself into the foot. Dmitri --
2013 Jan 16
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] A "very verbose" mode for FileCheck
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> When someone breaks a FileCheck-based test on some buildbot,
2015 Nov 17
2
[RFC] A new intrinsic, `llvm.blackbox`, to explicitly prevent constprop, die, etc optimizations
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 8:55 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Dmitri Gribenko via llvm-dev > > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:03 AM, James Molloy via