The patch below addresses some pretty-printer issues. More precisely,
it handles 6 types of expressions that weren't handled before:
a) EXACT_DIV_EXPR, RDIV_EXPR,
b) LROTATE_EXPR, RROTATE_EXPR,
c) MAX_EXPR, MIN_EXPR.
Right now we print for the testcase below:
#'exact_div_expr' not supported by expression#'pr35441.c: In function 'foo1':
pr35441.c:8:6: error: called object is not a function or function pointer
#'rdiv_expr' not supported by expression#'pr35441.c: In function 'foo2':
pr35441.c:13:5: error: called object is not a function or function pointer
#'lrotate_expr' not supported by expression#'pr35441.c: In function 'foo3':
pr35441.c:18:11: error: called object is not a function or function pointer
#'rrotate_expr' not supported by expression#'pr35441.c:19:11: error: called
object is not a function or function pointer
#'min_expr' not supported by expression#'pr35441.c: In function 'foo4':
pr35441.c:24:14: error: called object is not a function or function pointer
#'max_expr' not supported by expression#'pr35441.c:25:14: error: called
object is not a function or function pointer
With the patch we would print:
pr35441.c: In function 'foo1':
pr35441.c:8:6: error: called object '((long int)p - (long int)q) / 8' is not
a function or function pointer
pr35441.c: In function 'foo2':
pr35441.c:13:5: error: called object 'x / y' is not a function or function
pointer
pr35441.c: In function 'foo3':
pr35441.c:18:11: error: called object 'i << j' is not a function or function
pointer
pr35441.c:19:11: error: called object 'i >> j' is not a function or function
pointer
pr35441.c: In function 'foo4':
pr35441.c:24:14: error: called object 'min(q, p)' is not a function or
function pointer
pr35441.c:25:14: error: called object 'max(q, p)' is not a function or
function pointer
a) This part (with foo1 and foo2 from the testcase) is straightforward.
However, I'm not sure how to print the actual operators for the other
2 groups.
b) I chose the shift operators 'a << b' and 'a >> b' for the rotate
expressions, which is not 100% correct. Would it be better to use
something like 'lrotate(a, b)', '__lrotate__(a, b)' or 'a lrotate b'
instead? Or is there something like an '__builtin_lrotate' that I misseed?
c) I chose 'max(q, b)' and 'min(q, b)'.
Would something like '__max__(q, b)' be better?
Trying to print the expression 'p < q ? p : q' from the testcase
might be possible. But there are several different expressions like
'p < q ? p : q', 'p > q ? q : p', 'p >= q ? q : p' and '!(p >= q) ? p : q'
that are all converted into MIN_EXPR, so I would rather stay with
and explicit 'min'/'max' instead.
In addition I found some more division operators in gcc/tree.def that
aren't handled by the pretty-printer:
CEIL_DIV_EXPR
FLOOR_DIV_EXPR
ROUND_DIV_EXPR
CEIL_MOD_EXPR
FLOOR_MOD_EXPR
ROUND_MOD_EXPR
Alas I don't have testcases for them. Nevertheless, I could handle them
like the other MOD and DIV operators just to be safe.
Any comments, or is the patch OK as is for trunk?
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux.
Regards,
Volker
2017-03-09 Volker Reichelt <v.reich...@netcologne.de>
PR c/35441
* c-pretty-print.c (c_pretty_printer::expression): Handle MAX_EXPR,
MIN_EXPR, EXACT_DIV_EXPR, RDIV_EXPR, LROTATE_EXPR, RROTATE_EXPR.
(c_pretty_printer::postfix_expression): Handle MAX_EXPR, MIN_EXPR.
(c_pretty_printer::multiplicative_expression): Handle EXACT_DIV_EXPR,
RDIV_EXPR.
(pp_c_shift_expression): Handle LROTATE_EXPR, RROTATE_EXPR.
Index: gcc/c-family/c-pretty-print.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/c-family/c-pretty-print.c (revision 245962)
+++ gcc/c-family/c-pretty-print.c (working copy)
@@ -1551,6 +1551,14 @@
: "__builtin_islessgreater");
goto two_args_fun;
+ case MAX_EXPR:
+ pp_c_ws_string (this, "max");
+ goto two_args_fun;
+
+ case MIN_EXPR:
+ pp_c_ws_string (this, "min");
+ goto two_args_fun;
+
two_args_fun:
pp_c_left_paren (this);
expression (TREE_OPERAND (e, 0));
@@ -1829,6 +1837,8 @@
case MULT_EXPR:
case TRUNC_DIV_EXPR:
case TRUNC_MOD_EXPR:
+ case EXACT_DIV_EXPR:
+ case RDIV_EXPR:
multiplicative_expression (TREE_OPERAND (e, 0));
pp_c_whitespace (this);
if (code == MULT_EXPR)
@@ -1890,9 +1900,12 @@
{
case LSHIFT_EXPR:
case RSHIFT_EXPR:
+ case LROTATE_EXPR:
+ case RROTATE_EXPR:
pp_c_shift_expression (pp, TREE_OPERAND (e, 0));
pp_c_whitespace (pp);
- pp_string (pp, code == LSHIFT_EXPR ? "<<" : ">>");
+ pp_string (pp,
+ code == LSHIFT_EXPR || code == LROTATE_EXPR ? "<<" : ">>");
pp_c_whitespace (pp);
pp_c_additive_expression (pp, TREE_OPERAND (e, 1));
break;
@@ -2186,6 +2199,8 @@
case UNLT_EXPR:
case UNGE_EXPR:
case UNGT_EXPR:
+ case MAX_EXPR:
+ case MIN_EXPR:
case ABS_EXPR:
case CONSTRUCTOR:
case COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR:
@@ -2217,11 +2232,15 @@
case MULT_EXPR:
case TRUNC_MOD_EXPR:
case TRUNC_DIV_EXPR:
+ case EXACT_DIV_EXPR:
+ case RDIV_EXPR:
multiplicative_expression (e);
break;
case LSHIFT_EXPR:
case RSHIFT_EXPR:
+ case LROTATE_EXPR:
+ case RROTATE_EXPR:
pp_c_shift_expression (this, e);
break;
2017-03-09 Volker Reichelt <v.reich...@netcologne.de>
PR c/35441
* gcc.dg/pr35441.c: New test.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr35441.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr35441.c 2017-03-08 18:38:39
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr35441.c 2017-03-08 23:43:06
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+/* PR c/35441 */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-fno-diagnostics-show-caret" } */
+/* { dg-bogus "not supported by" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } */
+
+void foo1(char **p, char **q)
+{
+ (p - q)(); /* { dg-error "is not a function" } */
+}
+
+void foo2(double x, double y)
+{
+ (x/y)(); /* { dg-error "is not a function" } */
+}
+
+void foo3(unsigned i, int j)
+{
+ (i << j | i >> (32 - j))(); /* { dg-error "is not a function" } */
+ (i >> j | i << (32 - j))(); /* { dg-error "is not a function" } */
+}
+
+void foo4(char *p, char *q)
+{
+ (p < q ? p : q)(); /* { dg-error "is not a function" } */
+ (p > q ? p : q)(); /* { dg-error "is not a function" } */
+}
===================================================================
