Re: [GIMPLE FE] Handle abs_expr

[Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>]

On Tue, 7 Feb 2017, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:

> Hi Richard,
> The attached patch tries to handle ABS_EXPR in gimple-fe.
> I am not sure if __ABS_EXPR should be parsed as id (like __MEM)
> or parse it as keyword (like __GIMPLE). Currently in the patch, I
> parse it as id.
> Patch passes gimplefe tests, is it OK to commit after bootstrap+test ?

Few comments - the new oper_code argument to unary parsing seems
superfluous - you check the name again for __ABS_EXPR.  Also I'd
spell it __ABS, without the _EXPR part.

For __MEM we go to binary op parsing and then take the "not binary op"
route.  I guess some refactoring might clean up things here - not for
now though.

I'm not sure whether new RID_ keywords would be prefered for this
kind of stuff.  We added one for __PHI.  Joseph, is the RID_ space
somehow limited so that we should avoid ending up with, say, up to
226 RID_s for GIMPLE (upper estimate taken from the number of
tree codes we have in tree.def)?  I see currently cpplib puts
rid_code into an unsigned char and we do already seem to have quite
some of them (114 if I count correctly).

Thanks,
Richard.