[committed] clean up preprocessor conditional (Re: [PATCH 4/5] distinguish likely and unlikely results (PR 78703))

[Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>]

I committed the patch below to clean up the "mess."

Thanks
Martin

Index: gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c	(revision 244957)
+++ gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c	(working copy)
@@ -1686,20 +1686,10 @@ format_floating (const directive &dir, tree arg)
 	prec[0] = -1;
       if (prec[1] < 0)
 	{
-#ifdef HAVE_XFmode
-	  /* When L is specified use long double, otherwise double.  */
-	  unsigned fmtprec
-	    = (dir.modifier == FMT_LEN_L
-	       ? REAL_MODE_FORMAT (XFmode)->p
-	       : REAL_MODE_FORMAT (DFmode)->p);
-#elif defined HAVE_DFmode
-	  /* No long double support, use double precision for both.  */
-	  unsigned fmtprec = REAL_MODE_FORMAT (DFmode)->p;
-#else
-	  /* No long double or double support.  */
-	  unsigned fmtprec = 0;
-#endif
-	  /* The precision of the IEEE 754 double format is 53.
+          unsigned fmtprec
+	    = REAL_MODE_FORMAT (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (arg)))->p;
+
+	       /* The precision of the IEEE 754 double format is 53.
 	     The precision of all other GCC binary double formats
 	     is 56 or less.  */
 	  prec[1] = fmtprec <= 56 ? 13 : 15;

Thanks
Martin

On 01/26/2017 06:12 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > With this patch all my builds for aarch64/arm failed:
> > > /gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c: In function
> > > ‘<unnamed>::fmtresult<unnamed>::format_floating(const<unnamed>::direc
> > > tive&, tree_node*)’:
> > > /gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c:1643: error: ‘XFmode’ was not declared in this
> > > scope
> > >
> > > Is this fixed later in the series?
> >
> >
> > It isn't.  I just reproduced it with an aarch64 cross-compiler so
> > I hope to be able to fix it quickly.
>
> This actually broke any non-x86 targeted GCC.
>
> Even the current code is wrong:
> #ifdef HAVE_XFmode
>           /* When L is specified use long double, otherwise double.  */
>           unsigned fmtprec
>             = (dir.modifier == FMT_LEN_L
>                ? REAL_MODE_FORMAT (XFmode)->p
>                : REAL_MODE_FORMAT (DFmode)->p);
> #elif defined HAVE_DFmode
>           /* No long double support, use double precision for both.  */
>           unsigned fmtprec = REAL_MODE_FORMAT (DFmode)->p;
> #else
>           /* No long double or double support.  */
>           unsigned fmtprec = 0;
> #endif
>
>
> Shouldn't this be based instead on long_double_type_node instead?
> Because different targets might have an option to select different
> modes.
>
> So it just becomes something like which simplifies the mess you have currently:
>           /* When L is specified use long double, otherwise double.  */
>           unsigned fmtprec
>             = (dir.modifier == FMT_LEN_L
>                ? REAL_MODE_FORMAT (TYPE_MODE (long_double_type_node))->p
>                : REAL_MODE_FORMAT (TYPE_MODE ((double_type_node))->p);
>
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
>
> > Martin