similar to: [RFC] Intrinsic naming convention (words with dots)

Considering the python code: for k, v in d.items(): do_something(k); do_something_else(v) I have the following for R: for (i in c(1:length(d))) { do_something(names(d[i])); do_something_else(d[[i]]) } This does not seem seems idiomatic. What is the best way of doing the same with R? Thanks. Luis

I 'm using locals recover to have a seh finally in a separate function: %1 = alloca i8*, align 4 store i8* %0, i8** %1 %2 = alloca i32 store i32 0, i32* %2 call void (...) @llvm.localescape(i8** %1, i32* %2) call my finaly like: %loctmp = call i8* @llvm.localaddress() call void @"TEST$Fin0"(i8 0, i8* %loctmp) and recover it with: %2 = call i8* @llvm.localrecover(i8*

On 27 March 2014 15:30, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > For global ones, it should also codegen every non inline asm to use an > llvm intrinsic (llvm.read_register/llvm.write_register for example). That's my idea, yes. I'm not sure how Clang would transform the named registers into the intrinsic, but something along the lines of: i8* @SP =

Hi, I want implement an instrumentation that gets the current PC. On x86_64 I can do it using inline asm (something like "lea (%%rip),%0"), but I wonder if there is some more LLVM-ish way to do it, e.g. an intrinsic? I can only find r208104 which introduces llvm.read_register: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140505/215840.html The LangRef says: > Warning:

I would guess that %threedoubles has a large alignment and that is making things go wrong. I thought we fixed this bug, though. I can't find it in the tracker, but it's in there. Someone used __try with local variables of type 'double' on 32-bit and things didn't work out. I'm pretty sure we fixed it though. On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:53 AM Carlo Kok via llvm-dev <

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 1:45 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 26 January 2017 at 00:08, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I want implement an instrumentation that gets the current PC. > > On x86_64 I can do it using inline asm (something like "lea (%%rip),%0"), > > but I wonder if there

On 31 Jan 2017 8:58 p.m., "Kostya Serebryany" <kcc at google.com> wrote: hmm. I am not sure I understood you. The last two paragraphs seem to contradict each other. So, you recommend to extend read_register to read the PC, or "read_register is locked at the stack pointer as a design decision"? Both. :-) There was a design decision to only support SP because we had no

On 26 January 2017 at 00:08, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I want implement an instrumentation that gets the current PC. > On x86_64 I can do it using inline asm (something like "lea (%%rip),%0"), > but I wonder if there is some more LLVM-ish way to do it, e.g. an intrinsic? Hi Kostya, I'd also want something that GCC

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 31 Jan 2017 8:58 p.m., "Kostya Serebryany" <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > hmm. I am not sure I understood you. The last two paragraphs seem to > contradict each other. > So, you recommend to extend read_register to read the PC, or > "read_register is locked at the

Folks, So, I think we kind of agree that some named registers could be implemented, and that it should be an intrinsic that passes the name of the register down. This C code: register unsigned long current_stack_pointer asm("sp"); unsigned long get_stack_pointer_addr() { return current_stack_pointer; } void set_stack_pointer_addr(unsigned long addr) { current_stack_pointer = addr;

Hi, I'm trying to use the statepoint-example strategy to build a simple garbage collector. After using the PlaceSafepoints and RewriteStatepointsForGC passes, I can successfully generate a stack map in my binary and call into my runtime's gc poll. As far as I can tell, I need the stack pointer at the point of the poll to find the correct frame in the stack map. I'm having trouble

Several instruction set architectures include arithmetic operations that can trap on overflow, or support this feature with a separate trap-on-overflow-flag instruction (such as the x86 INTO instruction). I am adding a back-end to the Open Dylan compiler to generate LLVM IR. The original back-end, which generates x86 machine code, makes use of the INTO instruction, and the runtime turns the

Hi, extractRangeChecksFromBranch uses BranchProbabilityInfo to decide whether its worth trying the InductiveRangeCheckElimination transformation. For the following example: void split() { for (int i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { if (i < 99) do_something() else do_something_else() } } But the reported BPI is reported as 50/50 to whether do_something will be called, but we

Sorry, what does "PC" mean here? ________________________________ From: Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2018 7:27 AM To: Jordan Rudd; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Passing stack pointer to statepoint-gc Jordon, First of all, StackMaps are keyed by PC, not by SP. Each entry corresponds to given location within the

Hi, all. I have noticed that LLVM supports some Intrinsic Functions such as *"** llvm.sadd.with.overflow"* described in http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#int_sadd_overflow. We can use these functions and needn't define the function bodies. For example, I can manually insert codes: * %res = call {i32, i1} @llvm.sadd.with.overflow.i32(i32 %a, i32 %b) %sum = extractvalue

Hi guys, I just noticed that the LLVM has some node for signed/unsigned type( like udiv, sdiv), but why the ADD, SUB do not have the counter part sadd, uadd? best kevin

On Aug 9, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Peter S. Housel wrote: > Several instruction set architectures include arithmetic operations that can trap on overflow, or support this feature with a separate trap-on-overflow-flag instruction (such as the x86 INTO instruction). > > > I am adding a back-end to the Open Dylan compiler to generate LLVM IR. The original back-end, which generates x86

After chatting on IRC, Peter wants a very specific interrupt (int4 on x86). I suggested he add a new llvm.x86.int(i32) intrinsic, and use the existing branch on llvm.sadd.with.overflow intrinsic. The x86 backend can then turn jo+int4 into into when reasonable. -Chris On Aug 9, 2010, at 5:45 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Aug 9, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Peter S. Housel wrote: > >>

Hi all, What do people think of doing away with the @llvm.convert.to.fp16 and @llvm.convert.from.fp16 intrinsics, in favour of using "half" and fpext/fptrunc? [1] It looks like those intrinsics originally date from before "half" actually existed in LLVM, and of course the backends have grown up assuming that's what Clang will produce, so we'd have to improve their

Dear all, I am looking at the R-help entry below: http://finzi.psych.upenn.edu/R/Rhelp02/archive/26640.html I have a more complicatedt problem. I have a zoo time series frame with 100+ sequences. I want to cycle through them back and forth and compare them to the 1st column at any time. I need also a button to click when I need the viewed-selected sequence (that is being compared to the