facilitate the nice formatting of lambdas passed there. Suggested by
Chris during review of my lambda additions, and something I strongly
agree with.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202622 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
about a few constructs in C++11 that are worth starting off in
a consistent manner within the codebase.
This will be matched with a change to clang-format's LLVM style which
will switch the options to support C++11 and use these conventions.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202620 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
it interoperate (minimally) with std::unique_ptr<T>. This is part of my
plan to migrate LLVM to use std::unique_ptr with a minimal impact on
out-of-tree code.
Patch by Ahmed Charles with some minor cleanups (and bool casts) by me.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202608 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The docs now build cleanly. Yay!
The following warnings were fixed:
/home/sean/pg/llvm/llvm/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.rst:364: WARNING: Enumerated list ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
/home/sean/pg/llvm/llvm/docs/InAlloca.rst:: WARNING: document isn't included in any toctree
/home/sean/pg/llvm/llvm/docs/CodingStandards.rst:85: WARNING: Title underline too short.
Supported C++11 Language and Library Features
-------------------------------------------
/home/sean/pg/llvm/llvm/docs/CodingStandards.rst:85: WARNING: Title underline too short.
Supported C++11 Language and Library Features
-------------------------------------------
/home/sean/pg/llvm/llvm/docs/GettingStarted.rst:185: WARNING: Explicit markup ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
/home/sean/pg/llvm/llvm/docs/GettingStarted.rst:565: WARNING: Explicit markup ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
/home/sean/pg/llvm/llvm/docs/GettingStarted.rst:567: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202603 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
This generalizes the code to eliminate extra truncs/exts around i1 bit
operations to also do the same on PPC64 for i32 bit operations. This eliminates
a fairly prevalent code wart:
int foo(int a) {
return a == 5 ? 7 : 8;
}
On PPC64, because of the extension implied by the ABI, this would generate:
cmplwi 0, 3, 5
li 12, 8
li 4, 7
isel 3, 4, 12, 2
rldicl 3, 3, 0, 32
blr
where the 'rldicl 3, 3, 0, 32', the extension, is completely unnecessary. At
least for the single-BB case (which is all that the DAG combine mechanism can
handle), this unnecessary extension is no longer generated.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202600 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
to the build being C++11.
There is clearly still plenty of simplification than can be done here by
using standard type traits instead of rolling our own in many places.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202586 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
on the fact that we now build in C++11 mode with modern compilers. This
should flush out any issues. If the build bots are happy with this, I'll
GC all the code for coping without R-value references.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202574 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
lib/Support/RWMutex.cpp contains an implementation of RWMutex that
uses pthread_rwlock, but when pthread_rwlock is not available (such as
under NaCl, when using newlib), it silently falls back to using the
no-op definition in lib/Support/Unix/RWMutex.inc, which is not
thread-safe.
Fix this case to be thread-safe by using a normal mutex.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2892
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202570 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
baseline is now C++11, and we unconditionally add -std=c++11 to the
flags.
This has the dim potential to break some non-GNU-compatible compiler (in
terms of -std flags) using the makefiles, but those makefiles are
littered with GNU-style compile flags so it would be very surprising to
me for it to actually happen in practice. As always, do let me know if
there is a toolchain you're using where this doesn't work, and I'll be
watching the bots.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202569 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
LLVM_ENABLE_CXX1Y (default *off*). =D C++98 is dead. Long live C++11.
I don't exactly recommend using C++1y just yet though...
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202567 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
The switch has been thrown. While I'm still watching for any failures or
problems with this, the documentation can go ahead and move forward.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202566 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
Inside iterate, we scan backwards then scan forwards in a loop. When iteration
is not zero, the last node was just updated so we can skip it. But when
iteration is zero, we can't skip the last node.
For the testing case, fixing this will save a spill and move register copies
from hot path to cold path.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@202557 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
