similar to: [LLVMdev] [llvm] r201432 - Remove myself as owner of libc++

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com> wrote: > On Feb 14, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Feb 14, 2014, at 1:09 PM, Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> Author: hhinnant >>> Date: Fri Feb 14 15:09:01 2014 >>> New Revision: 201432 >>>

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com> wrote: > On Sep 28, 2012, at 5:54 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > Reduced testcase: > > > > template<typename T> struct A { typedef decltype(T() + 0) type; }; > > template<typename T> struct B { > > struct C { typedef typename

On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:18 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com> wrote: > On Sep 28, 2012, at 5:54 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > Reduced testcase: > > > > template<typename T> struct A { typedef decltype(T() + 0) type; }; > >

On Nov 6, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > Binutils and LLVM > > As part of "owning our own toolchain", various people have expressed an interest and have been working on creating various tools that duplicate the functionality of tools available on other systems. I have summarized the information that I've gathered, and put it up

Binutils and LLVM As part of "owning our own toolchain", various people have expressed an interest and have been working on creating various tools that duplicate the functionality of tools available on other systems. As a start, I'd like to summarize the current status, and ask people for help updating the list. List taken from <http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/>

In a discussion on IRC, Micheal was complaining about the semantics of StringSet, specifically how the iterators work. DannyB mentioned that we have a Trie class, so I decided to check it out. Lo and behold, I couldn't find _any_ uses of it, and when I deleted it from my system and did a clean rebuild, everything was fine. Looking at the log, the last substantial change to this class was in

<dynarray> was added to the C++14 standard, libc++ implemented it, and then it was removed. Now (from the standard’s point of view), it is in limbo. I would like to move it into std/experimental; to make it clear that it’s not a part of the standard. Any objections? Anyone using it? — Marshall

The file begins: > #ifndef LLVM_SUPPORT_WIN_COFF_H > #define LLVM_SUPPORT_WIN_COFF_H Why "WIN_COFF_H" - since this code is not windows-specific, as far as I can tell. -- Marshall Marshall Clow Idio Software <mailto:mclow.lists at gmail.com> A.D. 1517: Martin Luther nails his 95 Theses to the church door and is promptly moderated down to (-1, Flamebait). --

On Mar 12, 2013, at 7:36 AM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Renato, > >> The test is initializing srand(1), so in theory, it shouldn't be different >> between compilers, since Clang is using the same libraries. > > If Clang and GCC disagree on the same source, same machine and with > the same libraries, that certainly is odd. But it

So, I'm trying to use this file to look inside COFF files. Got the header. OK. Now I want to look at the sections. Look, there's a section iterator. I can use that! So, I write: for (llvm::object::section_iterator iter = Obj.begin_sections (); iter != Obj.end_sections(); ++iter ) and it doesn't compile. There's no ++ for section iterators. Apparently, you're supposed to

On Jun 13, 2012, at 4:47 PM, Mikael Lyngvig wrote: > 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 it so that it some day becomes more than just > > bare

Delete it. =] Thanks. On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > In a discussion on IRC, Micheal was complaining about the semantics of > StringSet, specifically how the iterators work. > > DannyB mentioned that we have a Trie class, so I decided to check it out. > Lo and behold, I couldn't find _any_ uses of it, and when I deleted

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote: > On 1 June 2015 at 07:20, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > >> This weekend, I got an email from Nuno Lopes informing me that UBSAN now >> paid attention to attribute(nonnull), and he was having some problems with >> it going off when using libc++. >> > >

On Jul 4, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > Hello! > > We want to implement in-process symbolizer for {Address,Thread}Sanitizer testing tools that would be based on LLVM libraries. > I've noticed that llvm-nm (as well as other tools) doesn't demangle C++ names. Is it true, that LLVM doesn't have the code that is capable > of that, and if yes, are there any

On 12 March 2013 14:53, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > I agree; I'm pretty sure that the only guarantee is that for a given > implementation of stand, if you initialize it with the same seed, you get > the same sequence. > > There is no "correct" sequence. > I'm not suggesting a correct sequence, I'm just looking for a way to turn

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > As part of the work on C++17, WG21 released a series of "Technical > Specifications", (TS) which added proposed new features to the standard > library. These were all defined in the namespace 'std::experimental' (and > namespaces inside of that). > > Then, much of these

If you haven't already found it, you should look inside tools/llvm-objdump/llvm-objdump.cpp, which is an easy-to-follow example of how these APIs work --Sean Silva. On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com>wrote: > So, I'm trying to use this file to look inside COFF files. > Got the header. OK. > > Now I want to look at the sections.

On May 21, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Villmow, Micah wrote: > I found a bug in the expansion code for SUB going back to at least LLVM 2.6 and still shows up in trunk. > case ISD::SUB: { > EVT VT = Node->getValueType(0); > assert(TLI.isOperationLegalOrCustom(ISD::ADD, VT) && > TLI.isOperationLegalOrCustom(ISD::XOR, VT) && > "Don't

Over the weekend I upgraded my system to Mac OS X 10.8, and now a clean cmake build fails. The error message: > Building C object runtime/libprofile/CMakeFiles/profile_rt-static.dir/CommonProfiling.c.o > cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-Wcovered-switch-default" The configuration: > Mac OS X 10.8 > CMake 2.8.8 > LLVM tot > Apple clang version 4.0

I found a bug in the expansion code for SUB going back to at least LLVM 2.6 and still shows up in trunk. case ISD::SUB: { EVT VT = Node->getValueType(0); assert(TLI.isOperationLegalOrCustom(ISD::ADD, VT) && TLI.isOperationLegalOrCustom(ISD::XOR, VT) && "Don't know how to expand this subtraction!"); Tmp1 = DAG.getNode(ISD::XOR, dl,