similar to: Excessive use of LLVM_FALLTHROUGH?

Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, There was a discussion on this topic a while ago, and now I've decided to make a formal proposal and post it here. I propose to add the LLVM_FALLTHROUGH macro for specifying intended fall-through locations between switch cases. *INTRODUCTION* The switch construct of C/C++ languages allows fall-throughs between switch labels when control flow is not directed

<dropping llvm-commits> On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, > > There was a discussion on this topic a while ago, and now I've decided to make a formal proposal and post it here. I missed the earlier discussion, so I'm sorry for chiming in late. > I propose to add the LLVM_FALLTHROUGH macro for specifying intended

On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > <dropping llvm-commits> > > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > >> Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, >> >> There was a discussion on this topic a while ago, and now I've decided to make a formal proposal and post it here. > > I missed the earlier

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > > <dropping llvm-commits> > > > > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > > > >> Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, > >> > >> There was a discussion on

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Cameron McInally <cameron.mcinally at nyu.edu>wrote: > Hey Alex, > > Sorry if this is a silly question... are you asking if anyone "wants the > functionality proposed" or "wants to write the code for the functionality > proposed"? > *-Wimplicit-fallthrough* diagnostic is already implemented, and the patch in this thread

On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> >> > <dropping llvm-commits> >> > >> > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander

Ping. On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:

Ping. On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > Ping. > > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at

Great! Thanks everyone for the input, I'm going to start splitting up the patch. I'll send out the non-mechanical parts separately. On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:03 PM Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Oct 31, 2018, at 2:24 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > > Alex Kornienko proposed enabling this warning back in 2012 here: >

This is Chris' call to make, imo. -j On Aug 22, 2012, at 3:59 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com> wrote: > Ping. > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com> wrote: > Ping. > > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard

I'll save you a review iteration. This is updated to match llvm coding style. Capital camel case variable names and uses LLVM_FALLTHROUGH instead of the comment. static bool printAsmMRegister(X86AsmPrinter &P, const MachineOperand &MO, char Mode, raw_ostream &O) { unsigned Reg = MO.getReg(); + bool EmitPercent = true; + switch (Mode) {

Dear List, I need a barplot with vertical bars. Each bar should have a label. The problem is, that the labels are too long, so they overlap, or only every seccond label is displayed in the output. Here is a little syntax: dd <- c(100,110,90,105,95) barplot(dd,names.arg=c('Conduct Disorders','Attention Deficit', 'Eating Disorders',

On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 15:47 -0800, Craig Topper wrote: > I'll save you a review iteration. This is updated to match llvm > coding style. Capital camel case variable names and uses > LLVM_FALLTHROUGH instead of the comment. Thanks. How's this for a test? ; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=i686-- -no-integrated-as | FileCheck -check-prefix=X86 %s ; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=x86_64--

On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 23:30 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote: > This should go to llvm-commits as a proper review. Do you want to do > that David? Want someone on our end to pick it up? I'll attempt to add some test cases... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5213 bytes Desc: not available

Pete Cooper and I have been looking at memory profiles of running llc on verify-uselistorder.lto.opt.bc (ld -save-temps dump just before CodeGen of building verify-uselistorder with -flto -g). I've attached leak-backend.patch, which we're using to make Intrustruments more accurate (instead of effectively leaking things onto BumpPtrAllocators, really leak them with malloc()). (I've

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:36, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 1/23/2017 5:21 AM, Jonas Paulsson wrote: >> Hi Eli, >> >> I would like to clarify generally what the difference is between returning SDValue() and Op (input argument unchanged) from LowerOperation()? >> >> My understanding is that returning SDValue()

Bringing everything back to this thread -- we now have %V support landed in top-of-tree, so wanted to get confirmation that top-of-tree is healthy for the kernel, or see what else we need to do. Also, huge thanks to David for jumping on several of the issues and the help from folks building Linux to check them. David, you had offered to work on the attribute: I'm actually happy to do that if

Hello all, I have,say 4 R objects... bar1, bar2, bar3, bar4.. that I'd like to include in an R package "foobar". The desired functionality would be: > library(foobar) > data(foo) > ls() [1] "bar1" "bar2" "bar3" "bar4" I've tried the following two approaches: 1) I created the file 'datalist' under pre-build directory

Dear List, I'm exploring the use of class inheritance for a package were developing. I want to try to build on existing a class, i first want to extend this a bit using a virtual class and then extend this virtual class in multiple other classes. This would be similar to bar3 in the example below. Since there are nice functions for creating an object of the first superclass i would like

Hi Don, On 25 September 2017 at 22:29, Don Hinton <hintonda at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for reporting this. > > Looks like this one was missed -- the declaration should have been #ifdef'd > away along with the definition. A quick grep indicates there are a number > of them that need to be fixed. > > Here's the original commit: > > commit