Re: [RFC] Do we want hierarchical options & encapsulation in a class

[Nathan Sidwell <nathan at acm dot org>]

On 05/15/2017 08:04 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 05/15/2017 01:33 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:

> > 1) The TDF_UID and TDF_NOUID options seem to be inverses of each other. Can't we just ditch the latter?
>
> One is used to paper over UIDs in order to preserve -fdebug-compare (I believe). And the second one
> is used to dump UIDd basically for *_DECL. As any of these is not default, both make sense.

Might I suggest we rename at least one of them then?

> > How does this differ from the current TDF_RTL meaning?  Is it implying 'TDF_RTL_ALL'? (same question about TDF_GIMPLE).
>
> Yes, -fdump-tree-xyz-rtl would be equal to -fdump-tree-xyz-rtl-all.

I wonder if we can name things to be a little clearer?  Here you're 
applying an rtl modifier to a tree dump.  I find that jarring, given we 
have rtl dumps themselves. (I don't have a good suggestion right now).

Given a blank sheet of paper, the current 'TDF_tree' dumps should really 
be 'TDF_gimple' dumps, so we'd have lang/ipa/gimple/rtl kinds of dumps. 
Such a renaming may be an unacceptable amount of churn though.

nathan

--
Nathan Sidwell