Sync libasr with LFortran
#2410
Conversation
czgdp1807
force-pushed
the
libasr_sync_05
branch
from
9652197 to
3031306
Compare
|
The changes look good at first sight, but I have not carefully reviewed every single one of them. If you have any doubts about some area, please point me to it. Otherwise let's get tests to pass and then we'll do a final review. |
src/bin/lpython.cpp
Outdated
| pass_options.verbose = compiler_options.verbose; | ||
| pass_options.all_symbols_mangling = compiler_options.all_symbols_mangling; | ||
| pass_options.module_name_mangling = compiler_options.module_name_mangling; | ||
| pass_options.global_symbols_mangling = compiler_options.global_symbols_mangling; | ||
| pass_options.intrinsic_symbols_mangling = compiler_options.intrinsic_symbols_mangling; | ||
| pass_options.verbose = compiler_options.po.verbose; | ||
| pass_options.all_symbols_mangling = compiler_options.po.all_symbols_mangling; | ||
| pass_options.module_name_mangling = compiler_options.po.module_name_mangling; | ||
| pass_options.global_symbols_mangling = compiler_options.po.global_symbols_mangling; | ||
| pass_options.intrinsic_symbols_mangling = compiler_options.po.intrinsic_symbols_mangling; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similarly, I think we can reuse compiler_options.po here.
|
I will continue the sync tomorrow. |
| @@ -3519,7 +3708,8 @@ namespace IntrinsicScalarFunctionRegistry { | |||
| {"exp2", {&Exp2::create_Exp2, &Exp2::eval_Exp2}}, | |||
| {"expm1", {&Expm1::create_Expm1, &Expm1::eval_Expm1}}, | |||
| {"fma", {&FMA::create_FMA, &FMA::eval_FMA}}, | |||
| {"floordiv", {&FloorDiv::create_FloorDiv, &FloorDiv::eval_FloorDiv}}, | |||
|
I shared some TBR (to be reverted) comments above. Also, I think there are changes related to Symbolic support that need to be reverted. |
czgdp1807
force-pushed
the
libasr_sync_05
branch
4 times, most recently
from
442d026 to
9626fdf
Compare
| std::vector<llvm::Value*> args = {tmp}; | ||
| builder->CreateCall(fn, args); | ||
| inline void call_lcompilers_free_strings() { | ||
| // if (strings_to_be_deallocated.n > 0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we need to uncomment this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually this is an incorrect fix. Correct fix should work with both LFortran and LPython.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, let's merge it as is, and then I will submit a new PR fixing them.
| width = atoi(format + 1); | ||
| if (dot_pos != NULL) { | ||
| dot_pos++; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gptsarthak can you review the changes here related to the formatting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I checked with a diffchecker and i dont see any difference between this and lfortran main, so it looks good to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good, thanks for the review!
czgdp1807
force-pushed
the
libasr_sync_05
branch
from
283be95 to
09493ac
Compare
lfortran/lfortran#2837