On May 19, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Chad Rosier mcros...@codeaurora.org wrote:
Hal and I discussed this on IRC and here's the synopsis (mostly in Hal's
words):
Many of these builtins turn into libc calls, and those do set errno. Marking
them as readnone is a problem, because we can
On May 19, 2014, at 10:05 AM, Hal Finkel hfin...@anl.gov wrote:
I'm not going to push this patch further because it's not the right
solution. In theory, I believe it is correct, but it breaks the
__buitlin escape hatch, which would likely result in serious
performance degradations.
I
Me too. Thanks Rafael,
-Chris
On Apr 29, 2014, at 2:42 PM, Eric Christopher echri...@gmail.com wrote:
Apologies, I'd actually thought Chris had gotten this.
At any rate, I'm cool with this.
LGTM.
-eric
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Rafael Espíndola
rafael.espind...@gmail.com
On Apr 24, 2014, at 6:55 PM, Nick Kledzik kled...@apple.com wrote:
I got a bug report that the unwinder is not using the return_address_register
value in the CIE. This patch fixes that. Instead of hard coding which
psudeo register number contains the saved return address in the stack
On Apr 2, 2014, at 12:14 PM, Chris Lattner clatt...@apple.com wrote:
On Apr 2, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Roman Divacky rdiva...@freebsd.org wrote:
Author: rdivacky
Date: Wed Apr 2 12:27:03 2014
New Revision: 205436
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=205436view=rev
Log:
Extend
On Apr 2, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Roman Divacky rdiva...@freebsd.org wrote:
Author: rdivacky
Date: Wed Apr 2 12:27:03 2014
New Revision: 205436
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=205436view=rev
Log:
Extend the SSE2 comment lexing to AVX2. Only 16byte align when not on AVX2.
This
On Mar 13, 2014, at 12:11 PM, Aaron Ballman aa...@aaronballman.com wrote:
Author: aaronballman
Date: Thu Mar 13 14:11:50 2014
New Revision: 203835
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=203835view=rev
Log:
Renaming the recently-created (r203830) props() range API to properties()
Fortunately, I don't get emotionally attached to my old code. I prefer that it
get rewritten by better programmers than me, but hey, deleting it outright
works too. :-)
-Chris
On Mar 6, 2014, at 2:14 PM, Ted Kremenek kreme...@apple.com wrote:
Argyrios corrected me that I read “blame wrong.
On Feb 26, 2014, at 2:22 AM, Tobias Grosser tob...@grosser.es wrote:
2) Adding the new severity level / the name of the diagnostic
Only small issues have been found in the patch. All of them have been
addressed. The last open issues was the name of the diagnostic. Richard
proposed 'info' or
On Feb 26, 2014, at 1:31 PM, Alp Toker a...@nuanti.com wrote:
It’s a bit odd, but since these are diagnostics, why not use the existing
-W flags? You should be able to -Werror one of these, control them with
#pragma clang diagnostics, etc. It doesn’t seem like we need more
complexity in
On Feb 26, 2014, at 2:26 PM, Hal Finkel hfin...@anl.gov wrote:
Upgrade all remarks to errors is a special case of upgrade
remarks
foo,bar,baz to errors, and presumably would one day be available
via something like `-Werror=remarks` or `-Werror=everything` (and
the
inverse via
On Feb 26, 2014, at 2:57 PM, Arthur O'Dwyer arthur.j.odw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Chris Lattner clatt...@apple.com wrote:
On Feb 26, 2014, at 2:26 PM, Hal Finkel hfin...@anl.gov wrote:
Remarks should often indicate things that are good (like this loop
On Feb 25, 2014, at 2:41 AM, Tobias Grosser tob...@grosser.es wrote:
On 02/25/2014 11:32 AM, David Majnemer wrote:
You've added some extra whitespace in the definition
of CXDiagnosticSeverity.
Perhaps more importantly, the enum isn't in increasing order anymore.
Hi David,
thanks for
On Feb 25, 2014, at 3:04 AM, Tobias Grosser tob...@grosser.es wrote:
On 02/25/2014 11:40 AM, Alexander Musman wrote:
Hi Tobias,
This looks like a typo (mixed 'note' and 'remark'):
Nice catch.
The attached patch fixes this typo.
Please make sure to update the docs as well, including:
On Jan 15, 2014, at 12:21 AM, Justin Bogner m...@justinbogner.com wrote:
Hold on, I don't think that's the right way to interpret this.
Allocating, wiring up, optimizing and deleting the block all have very
non-trivial compile-time cost. They introduce guaranteed malloc traffic.
Worse,
On Jan 13, 2014, at 2:52 PM, Eric Christopher echri...@gmail.com wrote:
- // If the body of the case is just a 'break', and if there was no
fallthrough,
- // try to not emit an empty block.
- if ((CGM.getCodeGenOpts().OptimizationLevel 0)
+ // If the body of the case
On Jan 14, 2014, at 9:58 PM, Justin Bogner m...@justinbogner.com wrote:
Chris Lattner sa...@nondot.org writes:
- // If the body of the case is just a 'break', and if there was no
fallthrough,
- // try to not emit an empty block.
- if ((CGM.getCodeGenOpts().OptimizationLevel 0
On Jan 6, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Eric Christopher echri...@gmail.com wrote:
You should wait for an explicit ack on committing a patch if it's in review.
It's a bit anti-social to do so otherwise and that people are waiting isn't a
good enough reason to skip that.
It is pretty common to commit
reverted. This is pretty standard with post-commit review.
-Chris
On Mon Jan 06 2014 at 3:15:54 PM, Chris Lattner clatt...@apple.com wrote:
On Jan 6, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Eric Christopher echri...@gmail.com wrote:
You should wait for an explicit ack on committing a patch if it's in
review. It's
On Sep 6, 2013, at 9:48 AM, Sylvestre Ledru sylves...@debian.org wrote:
On 03/09/2013 19:07, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
Ok, makes sense. Those uses can use an explicit -O1 though :-)
Sure.
I haven't seen -O being used in wild, so I OK with keeping it mapping to
-O2.
I'd be curious to
On Sep 3, 2013, at 9:00 AM, Daniel Dunbar daniel.dun...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 3, 2013, at 6:57, Rafael Espíndola rafael.espind...@gmail.com
wrote:
I find that a bit surprising, given that -O should mean -O1.
Daniel -- you changed it to mean -O2 in r82131. Any idea why?
Ping.
This
On Sep 3, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Rafael Espíndola rafael.espind...@gmail.com wrote:
This is something Chris requested, IIRC. I'm not sure I remember the
motivation beyond that.
Two reasons:
1) -O1 doesn't actually mean anything. It is the optimization level least
understood by both the GCC
Hi Nick, here's a quick concept review:
On Jul 3, 2013, at 9:27 PM, Nick Lewycky nlewy...@google.com wrote:
The attached patch implements support for 'readonly' and 'readnone' on
individual pointer-typed attributes. The llvm memcpy/memmove intrinsics are
given readonly on their source
On May 14, 2013, at 9:55 PM, Rafael Espíndola rafael.espind...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 14 May 2013 22:05, Hal Finkel hfin...@anl.gov wrote:
Anyone with Darwin knowledge have an opinion on how ptrdiff_t should be set
on ppc32? Unless someone objects soon, I'll consider David to be the new
Author: lattner
Date: Mon Apr 8 13:56:15 2013
New Revision: 179040
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=179040view=rev
Log:
In the comparison, both clang and GCC are popular and widely adopted. This is
no longer a win of GCC.
This whole doc should really be looked at.
Modified:
On Mar 25, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
The computation of Elt above looks to be correct only for little-endian
platforms ...
If I disable the whole OptimizeIntToFloatBitCast optimization, I get the
correct result again.
Yes, this does look endian
lead, Chris Lattner,
directly and point him to the reviews that have already been done and ask
him specifically what you need to do to get the backend approved.
There is no formal process in place for adding a new backend, and I
think if you keep posing your question to the list you will have
On Jan 31, 2013, at 4:54 AM, Tim Northover t.p.northo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I would also like to become the code owner of the AArch64 backend.
Would anyone object to me adding myself to the .txt file?
I've actually made the change now, but will obviously revert it if
there are
Author: lattner
Date: Mon Jan 21 12:28:26 2013
New Revision: 173066
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=173066view=rev
Log:
ReadSourceManagerBlock is skipping over records that can contain Blobs. Not
passing
in a StringRef to bind to them forces them to be unpacked into the Record as
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 12:24:13 2013
New Revision: 172905
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172905view=rev
Log:
this depends on the bitcode reader, since it is using it.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CMakeLists.txt
cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/Makefile
Modified:
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 12:28:24 2013
New Revision: 172906
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172906view=rev
Log:
these now depend on the bitcode reader too.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/tools/arcmt-test/CMakeLists.txt
cfe/trunk/tools/arcmt-test/Makefile
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 12:30:39 2013
New Revision: 172907
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172907view=rev
Log:
fix the unit tests too.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/unittests/AST/Makefile
cfe/trunk/unittests/ASTMatchers/CMakeLists.txt
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 12:45:35 2013
New Revision: 172908
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172908view=rev
Log:
these need the bitcode reader as well.
Modified:
clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-format/Makefile
clang-tools-extra/trunk/cpp11-migrate/Makefile
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 12:47:35 2013
New Revision: 172909
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172909view=rev
Log:
update header comment.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CXLoadedDiagnostic.cpp
Modified: cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CXLoadedDiagnostic.cpp
URL:
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 15:35:35 2013
New Revision: 172920
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172920view=rev
Log:
random tidying
Modified:
cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CXLoadedDiagnostic.cpp
Modified: cfe/trunk/tools/libclang/CXLoadedDiagnostic.cpp
URL:
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 15:39:22 2013
New Revision: 172922
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172922view=rev
Log:
switch a bunch of ASTReader to use the new BitstreamCursor::advance* methods,
which hide a bunch of private details of the cursor from clients and simplify
their
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 18:00:22 2013
New Revision: 172932
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172932view=rev
Log:
convert some more stuff over to use new cursor APIs.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/include/clang/Serialization/ASTReader.h
cfe/trunk/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 18:56:42 2013
New Revision: 172937
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172937view=rev
Log:
finish converting the normal cases in ASTReader to use the new BitstreamCursor
APIs.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
Modified:
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 18:57:52 2013
New Revision: 172938
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172938view=rev
Log:
add back a #include needed on some builders.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
URL:
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Jan 19 20:38:54 2013
New Revision: 172951
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172951view=rev
Log:
update to use the new BitcodeCursor readRecord that takes a StringRef blob
parameter,
and adopt advance in more places.
Modified:
On Jan 2, 2013, at 4:10 AM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
In C99, we are not permitted to shift a 1 bit into the sign bit.
Under C++11's rules, shifting a 1 bit into the sign bit is
OK, but shifting a 1 bit out of it is not. (C89 and C++03 don't
define signed left shifts, so we
On Dec 18, 2012, at 8:40 PM, Eli Friedman eli.fried...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, I see... so the idea is to hack up getCharAndSize instead of
calling isUCNAfterSlash/ConsumeUCNAfterSlash where we expect a UCN,
use a marker which essentially means saw a UCN.
Seems like a workable approach; I
On Dec 13, 2012, at 7:36 PM, Meador Inge mead...@codesourcery.com wrote:
PR 14529 was opened because neither Clang or LLVM was expanding
calls to creal* or cimag* into instructions that just load the
respective complex field. After some discussion, it was not
considered realistic to do this
On Dec 4, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@google.com wrote:
Chris, any final comments? Everyone else seems happy with this approach now.
Go for it. Please watch for regressions carefully :)
-Chris
___
cfe-commits mailing list
Does it make sense to only emit this attribute in the ambiguous case?
-Chris
On Dec 3, 2012, at 10:21 PM, Bill Wendling isanb...@gmail.com wrote:
Author: void
Date: Tue Dec 4 00:21:27 2012
New Revision: 169219
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=169219view=rev
Log:
Add a
On Dec 4, 2012, at 9:36 AM, Eric Christopher echri...@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't really matter.
Small savings of debug info size?
-Chris
-eric
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Chris Lattner clatt...@apple.com wrote:
Does it make sense to only emit this attribute in the ambiguous case
On Nov 29, 2012, at 4:23 PM, Stephen Canon sca...@apple.com wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 7:16 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
Generally, we still need to handle Eli's observation that the C and C++
extended integer type rules require us to make intmax_t be __int128 if we're
On Nov 10, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Nico Weber tha...@chromium.org wrote:
Hi,
I was reading Lexer.cpp today and didn't know what BCPLComment means
-- it's just a regular // comment. Would you mind if that got renamed
to LineComment? That's easier to understand and consistent with
BlockComment
On Nov 5, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Douglas Gregor dgre...@apple.com wrote:
Author: dgregor
Date: Mon Nov 5 13:45:09 2012
New Revision: 167397
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=167397view=rev
Log:
Hash the various compiler version, target, preprocessor, and
header-search options
On Oct 29, 2012, at 12:59 PM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@google.com wrote:
FWIW, I continue to think we should fix the attribute design first
before spreading its use throughout LLVM and Clang. I'm not going to
review any patches spreading its use until we get the design right, as
I don't
On Oct 28, 2012, at 6:54 AM, Dmitri Gribenko griboz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mahesha HS mahesha.l...@gmail.com wrote:
I curiously looked into the OpenMP parsing in GCC. It follows the
method of string comparison but *without* maintaining any string table
in a
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Oct 27 14:49:20 2012
New Revision: 166891
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=166891view=rev
Log:
Currently the initial value of Tok is dependent an the stack contents
and could cause the Parser to crash on the first ConsumeToken().
Patcy by Bas van den Berg!
On Oct 25, 2012, at 10:52 PM, Bas van den Berg b.van.den.berg...@gmail.com
wrote:
Currently the initial value of Tok is dependent an the stack contents
and could cause the Parser to crash on the first ConsumeToken().
LGTM, committed in r166891, thanks!
-Chris
Signed-off-by: Bas van den
On Oct 25, 2012, at 11:59 PM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Chris Lattner clatt...@apple.com wrote:
On Oct 25, 2012, at 3:27 PM, Richard Smith richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
wrote:
Author: rsmith
Date: Thu Oct 25 17:27:30 2012
New Revision
On Oct 25, 2012, at 3:27 PM, Richard Smith richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
Author: rsmith
Date: Thu Oct 25 17:27:30 2012
New Revision: 166731
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=166731view=rev
Log:
LLVM's hashing routines produce a size_t, and thus generate different values
On Oct 18, 2012, at 2:58 PM, Douglas Gregor dgre...@apple.com wrote:
On Oct 18, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Eric Christopher echri...@gmail.com wrote:
Author: echristo
Date: Thu Oct 18 16:52:18 2012
New Revision: 166236
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=166236view=rev
Log:
Add a
On Oct 18, 2012, at 6:11 AM, Patrik Hägglund H patrik.h.haggl...@ericsson.com
wrote:
We have a back-end with 16-bit bytes, and have changed the memset
intrinsics to be able to work on arbitrary word sizes, just as memcpy.
Hi Patrik,
This is interesting. Please start a thread on llvmdev
On Oct 18, 2012, at 1:00 AM, Ed Schouten e...@80386.nl wrote:
Hi all,
Attached is the latest version of a patch we use at FreeBSD to add
optimized multiply/divide functions on SPARC64. Description from the
original bug report[1]:
Very cool. Please send this to llvm-commits though.
On Oct 12, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Richard Trieu rtr...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Sean Silva sil...@purdue.edu wrote:
How many lines of code have you compiled with this warning enabled?
Millions.
How many bugs did it catch?
Hundreds.
How many false positives did it
On Oct 10, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Sean Silva sil...@purdue.edu wrote:
Ping.
Chris, could you take a look at this?
I don't think I have any special value to be added here. Some thoughts though:
I think it *does* make sense to allow cast's that obviously constant fold to
true or false from
On Oct 8, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Sean Silva sil...@purdue.edu wrote:
This patch set removes the last traces of RTTI from TableGen (both in
LLVM and Clang) and removes the crutch for enabling RTTI when building
it.
This all sounds fine to me, if it's ok with Jakob, go for it!
-Chris
Every
On Oct 3, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@google.com wrote:
Chris, pinging again. It's been 2 weeks since my last ping, and there since
Daniel Dunbar handed it off to you. ;]
Hi Chandler,
Sorry for the delay, I still haven't had a chance to look at your patch. That
said, here
On Oct 5, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Villmow, Micah micah.vill...@amd.com wrote:
I've attached a zip file containing all of the 17 different patches for the
various components and LLVM core.
Sounds fine, please consider these, and any other incremental steps along the
way as pre-approved.
-Chris
On Oct 4, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Villmow, Micah micah.vill...@amd.com wrote:
Chris, the problem with steps #2/#3 is that plenty of clients have forward
declarations of TargetData and the typedef won't work in this case, so I need
to update the clients anyways.
What about this sequence:
1)
On Oct 4, 2012, at 1:32 PM, Kim Gräsman kim.gras...@gmail.com wrote:
HI Micah,
On Thursday, October 4, 2012, Villmow, Micah wrote:
Chris, the problem with steps #2/#3 is that plenty of clients have forward
declarations of TargetData and the typedef won't work in this case, so I need
to
On Oct 4, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Villmow, Micah micah.vill...@amd.com wrote:
Here is the second step of #1, this does the datalayout renaming. I've also
renamed TargetAlignElem and TargetTypeEnum as they are not 'Target' objects
but Layout objects.
LGTM!
The next step will be to remap
On Oct 4, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Villmow, Micah micah.vill...@amd.com wrote:
Here is an updated version of the patch. If all testing goes well tomorrow
and this is version good I'll submit then.
LGTM if everything builds :)
Thanks for driving this forward Micah,
-Chris
On Sep 26, 2012, at 9:18 PM, Evan Cheng evan.ch...@apple.com wrote:
On Sep 26, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Hal Finkel hfin...@anl.gov wrote:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:16:22 -0700
Evan Cheng evan.ch...@apple.com wrote:
Sorry, I understand why you are requesting this but I thinking moving
TargetData to
Looks obvious to me, please commit.
-Chris
On Sep 5, 2012, at 5:40 PM, Enrico Granata egran...@apple.com wrote:
utf8_enable.diff
Hi all,
I am submitting the attached clang patch for approval.
I am doing data formatters work on LLDB, and in order for some of these data
formatters to
Author: lattner
Date: Fri Aug 31 17:39:21 2012
New Revision: 163034
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=163034view=rev
Log:
don't warn about unused values when the unused value is a statement expression
expanded from a macro. This is of dubious utility in general, but is
specifically
On Aug 26, 2012, at 11:37 PM, Ted Kremenek kreme...@apple.com wrote:
On Aug 25, 2012, at 12:09 PM, Chris Lattner clatt...@apple.com wrote:
Teach CFG that 'if (x 0)' and 'if (x * 0)' is an unfeasible branch.
Why not teach the general front-end constant folding logic (in
lib/AST
On Aug 24, 2012, at 12:42 AM, Ted Kremenek kreme...@apple.com wrote:
Author: kremenek
Date: Fri Aug 24 02:42:09 2012
New Revision: 162545
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=162545view=rev
Log:
Teach CFG that 'if (x 0)' and 'if (x * 0)' is an unfeasible branch.
Why not teach
On Aug 15, 2012, at 1:38 PM, John Criswell crisw...@illinois.edu wrote:
On 8/15/12 3:28 PM, Jordan Rose wrote:
On Aug 15, 2012, at 13:26 , Jordan Rose jordan_r...@apple.com wrote:
On Aug 15, 2012, at 13:22 , Eric Christopher echri...@apple.com wrote:
On Aug 15, 2012, at 1:17 PM, Eli
LGTM, applied in r161475, thanks!
On Aug 3, 2012, at 7:38 AM, Jonathan Sauer jonathan.sa...@gmx.de wrote:
Hello,
following the discussion in cfe-dev, I decided to change the wording on the
features page
concerning clang's license to make it clearer that it does not only allow
commercial
Author: lattner
Date: Wed Aug 8 00:26:51 2012
New Revision: 161475
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=161475view=rev
Log:
clarify that the advantages of the BSD license apply to when you incorporate
clang into proprietary code bases,
patch by Jonathan Sauer.
Modified:
On Jul 27, 2012, at 11:08 AM, Hal Finkel wrote:
load/stores makes sense in that context. I can only enable this if
its OpenCL, but I think anyone who uses vec3 would want this
performance win.
Interesting thanks! I was just wondering why there is a performance win
at all. I assume that
On Jul 24, 2012, at 7:10 AM, Jonathan Sauer wrote:
Hello,
Did you do any bootstrap performance investigation? Because like I said,
I had a patch like this before, and it had to be reverted due to bootstrap
performance problems.
I did; the patch resulted in less than one percent
On Jul 24, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
On Jul 24, 2012, at 7:10 AM, Jonathan Sauer wrote:
Hello,
Did you do any bootstrap performance investigation? Because like I said,
I had a patch like this before, and it had to be reverted due to bootstrap
performance problems.
I
On Jul 18, 2012, at 6:16 PM, Richard Trieu wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@google.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:12 AM, John McCall rjmcc...@apple.com wrote:
On Jul 18, 2012, at 2:28 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 11:47 PM,
On Jul 13, 2012, at 11:43 AM, Jordan Rose wrote:
This directly affects -Wobjc-literal-compare. In a private e-mail Chris
suggested leaving the fixit on the warning itself (it was originally an
error) since we're going to generate fairly useless code from what the user
wrote 98% of the
Author: lattner
Date: Tue Jul 10 00:03:05 2012
New Revision: 159980
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=159980view=rev
Log:
Jordan points out that this was incorrect: clang should recover from
*errors* with fixits on them by following the recovery advised by the
fixit, but if it is a
On Jun 28, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Benjamin Kramer wrote:
Author: d0k
Date: Thu Jun 28 15:08:55 2012
New Revision: 159371
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=159371view=rev
Log:
Dead code eliminate the massive hexagon builtin intrinsic supporting code.
The tablegen'd code does the
On Jun 26, 2012, at 7:00 PM, Richard Trieu wrote:
Author: rtrieu
Date: Tue Jun 26 21:00:20 2012
New Revision: 159249
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=159249view=rev
Log:
Update documentation with regards to template type diffing.
Would this, or any of the other recent
On Jun 20, 2012, at 8:16 AM, Ted Kremenek wrote:
On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:33 AM, John McCall rjmcc...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:21 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:03 AM, Ted Kremenek kreme...@apple.com wrote:
Author: kremenek
Date: Wed Jun 20 02:03:37
On Jun 20, 2012, at 11:53 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
Thanks John. That's sums it up well. Right now the workflow people know
is to pass -Wno- to silence a warning, and seeing the warning flag in the
diagnostic. This flag is completely different from that simple workflow.
My
On Jun 20, 2012, at 11:28 AM, Chad Rosier wrote:
Author: mcrosier
Date: Wed Jun 20 13:28:37 2012
New Revision: 158833
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=158833view=rev
Log:
[ms-style asm] Change the fatal error to an extension warning. Apparently,
this
error was asserting
On Jun 18, 2012, at 5:37 PM, Kaelyn Uhrain wrote:
Author: rikka
Date: Mon Jun 18 19:37:47 2012
New Revision: 158691
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=158691view=rev
Log:
Improve the error message when a function overload candidate is rejected
because it expects a reference
On Jun 8, 2012, at 11:52 AM, Chad Rosier wrote:
The attached patch etches out a new code path for MS style inline assembly in
the Parser, Sema, AST, and CodeGen. This is _largely_ a WIP!
The idea is to translate the MS style inline assembly into IR that is
equivalent to the GNU style
On Jun 7, 2012, at 4:10 PM, David Sehr wrote:
In anticipation of adding more tests to the file, I would like to
rename 2002-05-24-Alloca.c to alloca.c
Thoughts?
Sounds great! In general, dates should really be eradicated from test names.
Having them made sense back before we had
Author: lattner
Date: Sun May 27 20:47:53 2012
New Revision: 157557
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=157557view=rev
Log:
adjust to mainline llvm API change.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp
cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CodeGenModule.cpp
Modified:
On May 25, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
The primary concerns I have seen so far are it doesn't serve the needs for
all memory safety techniques. Did I miss some other specific concern about
alloc_size attribute?
On another note, one part of Nuno's goal for the summer is to implement
On May 4, 2012, at 4:27 AM, Hal Finkel wrote:
FWIW, I don't think that this makes sense from a community standpoint.
If you're serious about building a fortran frontend (which would be
really really cool). I think we should start it as another LLVM
subproject. It can certainly build
On May 4, 2012, at 10:21 AM, Matthieu Monrocq wrote:
If we set this up kind of like clang is
setup, then the build system will detect whether there is a fortran
subdirectory in clang, and if so, will build (defining
CLANG_HAS_FORTRAN or something like that) and link the extra components.
On May 4, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Chris Lattner clatt...@apple.com wrote:
On May 3, 2012, at 11:38 AM, Richard Smith wrote:
Author: rsmith
Date: Thu May 3 13:38:45 2012
New Revision: 156087
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project
Author: lattner
Date: Fri May 4 16:11:08 2012
New Revision: 156206
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=156206view=rev
Log:
remove something that is really old and out of date.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/docs/UsersManual.html
Modified: cfe/trunk/docs/UsersManual.html
URL:
On May 4, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
If we set this up kind of like clang is
setup, then the build system will detect whether there is a fortran
subdirectory in clang, and if so, will build (defining
CLANG_HAS_FORTRAN or something like that) and link the extra
components.
Should
On May 3, 2012, at 1:55 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
Hello,
In order to support our users who have Fortran codes, I would like to
start working on adding Fortran support into clang. While at first this
may seem like an odd fit, I think that it should work well for two
reasons:
FWIW, I don't
On May 3, 2012, at 11:38 AM, Richard Smith wrote:
Author: rsmith
Date: Thu May 3 13:38:45 2012
New Revision: 156087
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=156087view=rev
Log:
Remove diagnostic groups and DefaultIgnore from notes.
Should the clang tblgen plugin enforce that this
On May 3, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis wrote:
Author: akirtzidis
Date: Thu May 3 20:49:36 2012
New Revision: 156145
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=156145view=rev
Log:
[PCH] Really, pinky swear, fix for PR12689
DenseMap?
-Chris
rdar://11353109
Modified:
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Apr 28 11:12:17 2012
New Revision: 155759
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=155759view=rev
Log:
switch some uses of ExpectAndConsume(tok::semi to use ExpectAndConsumeSemi.
This allows
us to improve this diagnostic (telling us to insert another ):
t.c:2:19:
1 - 100 of 3476 matches
Mail list logo
