similar to: [LLVMdev] ud2 and lack of warning messages

Doing this would make clang's diagnostic output dependent on the optimization level, which is absolutely verboten. Also, a ud2 doesn't mean your program has a bug, and I doubt an asm-level diagnostic would be useful to anyone. A ud2 just means "if control flow ever reaches this point, the program has undefined behavior"; in that sense, they don't even have to be emitted.

[This is a rather long mail because I feel the topic is extremely important. I've never before experienced a C or C++ compiler that silently outputs crash-burn-and-die instructions and I think I've used more than 10 of the sort.] Hmm, I am mostly thinking of this in terms of an LLVM IR generator who does not have the benefit of an expertly written front-end that can add run-time checks.

Whoops... Seems I forgot the asterisk (*) after the cast. Or something. Because I did insert the cast and it didn't work. But NOW it works. Thank you for spending some time on this - and also for presenting the solution. -- Mikael 2013/12/4 Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> > This code: > > declare i32 @printf(i8* nocapture readonly, ...) nounwind > > define

I just tried adding the cast but it didn't help. I have the feeling that I am overlooking something very obvious, but I can't seem to figure out what it is. Thanks for your suggestion, though. -- Mikael 2013/12/3 Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> > > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > >> Hi,

That reminds me: Do the web documents reside in a repository somewhere or should I just grab them using wget? 2012/6/14 Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> > wrote: > > If nobody else is doing it, I can translate the FAQ into Sphinx as I'd > like > > to begin gradually extending

On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > Whoops... Seems I forgot the asterisk (*) after the cast. Or something. > Because I did insert the cast and it didn't work. But NOW it works. > Thank you for spending some time on this - and also for presenting the > solution. > It's not a "cast" for any meaning of cast in

Hi, It will probably take a few weeks or a month before the "Mapping High-Level Constructs to LLVM IR" document is ready for prime time. Until then, you can review and study it at this URL: https://github.com/archfrog/llvm-doc/blob/master/MappingHighLevelConstructsToLLVMIR.rst Please notice that I specifically do not advocate reviewing the document for a week or two. But feel free

This code: declare i32 @printf(i8* nocapture readonly, ...) nounwind define i32 @bar(i8* %c, i32 %i) #0 { entry: %call = tail call i32 (i8*, ...)* @printf(i8* %c, i8* %c) ret i32 %call } Is accepted without complaints by close-to-trunk llc on my Ubuntu machine. Eli On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > I just tried adding the cast but

We should make LLD to be able to build with GCC even if GCC is a bit buggy. So you wrote that it's no longer build because of the recent change of makeArrayRef removal? I think it's my change (r196475). Can you confirm that you can build if you revert that change? If it has caused the build with GCC to break, we should roll it back. On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Mikael Lyngvig

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > Hi Renato, > > My XU is on build 141 and there hasn't been a single problem yet. No > reboots, no crashes, and as far as I have observed no core dropouts (after > I did the cpu-freq trick you sent me). Perhaps I have a stable board or > perhaps it is because of its revision (rev. 0.3)?

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > That reminds me: Do the web documents reside in a repository somewhere or > should I just grab them using wget? The website is at http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/www/trunk/ . The llvm docs are in llvm/docs. Which actually makes me wonder if the LLVM-project FAQ (in reference to Chandler's post in

A quick question while I am adding a tiny section on ccache to the HowToAddABuilder document: Why do you set CCACHE_CPP2 to yes? From reading the manual, I get the impression that this is much slower than the default and that it should only be used with tricky compilers or when debugging. Is Clang such a tricky compiler? If so, I suppose Clang should be fixed, not the ccache configuration. --

It wouldn't take me more than an hour or two to do the format conversion. It is rather trivial, actually. Just say the word and I'm on to it like a starving bee. I guess I should get used to using the Sphinx layout; I'm simply more familiar with the format I use on my own websites. Have you guys ever considered making a less formal wiki for LLVM documentation - a place where tiny

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 3:50 AM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org>wrote: > >> It wouldn't take me more than an hour or two to do the format conversion. >> It is rather trivial, actually. Just say the word and I'm on to it like a >> starving bee. I

On 3 December 2013 16:08, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > You need to get the LLVM Sphinx docs using SVN or Git. If you want it, I > can do the changes for you since I have already everything in place. I think the changes he wants actually are in static html pages, at http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/www/trunk. Cheers. Tim.

On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 9:15 PM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > http://llvm.lyngvig.org/Articles/How-to-Setup-an-Arch-Linux-Buildbot-for-LLVM > Notice: You only need Ninja for the test build; none of the official LLVM builders use Ninja as far as I know. My buildbots use ninja. > Please notice that you must specify the absolute path to ninja, otherwise CMake

Hi Chris, Thanks for the supporting words! I'm pushing the document both for egoistic motives (like so many others, I'll learn a ton from this document) and for altruistic motives - the easier it is to implement a new language, the more interesting and highly well-thought out languages we will see in the future. And I see it as my purpose, as a mostly black-box user of LLVM, to enhance

Am I the only one who thinks that it is impractical that the Sphinx intro is buried deep within the lld documentation? I suggest moving it to the Programming Documentation document. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120616/2cb7356d/attachment.html>

On 17 November 2013 05:15, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > I finally got it to work - and my ODROID-XU is now a passive member of the > LLVM builder society for the next week or so, until it has proven itself > (it monitors changes to the SVN repository and builds in my end without > bothering anyone at LLVM.org about its findings). I did write up a

I tried this command to undo the change (which should revert to the change just before the one you mentioned): svn update -rr196474 Then I built from scratch. This time it built, so I suppose it is revision 196475 that is the problem. -- Mikael 2013/12/9 Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> > We should make LLD to be able to build with GCC even if GCC is a bit > buggy. So you