Re: [PATCH, rs6000] More diagnostic cleanup, addressing PR79845

[Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>]

Hi Segher,

Thanks for the review!

> On Aug 11, 2017, at 2:14 PM, Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Bill,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 04:28:49PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> This continues the cleanup of diagnostic messages in the rs6000 back end.  The
>> primary focus is to make sure that we use quoted strings with %qs, %<, %> as
>> appropriate, and that option strings are separated from translatable strings
>> to make things easier on the internationalization folks, as requested in
>> PR79845.  While working on this, I noticed a couple of places where the
>> diagnostic strings result in excessively long lines, and cleaned these up as
>> well.
>> 
>> One peculiarity I noticed, but did not attempt to address, is that a small
>> handful of diagnostic strings are tagged with _N ().  There doesn't seem to
>> be any rhyme or reason to this.  I expect it's a result of copy/paste from
>> somewhere and most of these strings should be translated.  But that's for
>> another day (and probably another person).
>> 
>> Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu (POWER8 64-bit) and on
>> powerpc64-linux-gnu (POWER7 32- and 64-bit) with no regressions.  Is this
>> okay for trunk?
> 
> Yes, thank you!  One comment:
> 
>> @@ -6128,17 +6128,18 @@ altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin (location_t loc
>> 
>>       if (nargs == 0)
>> 	{
>> -	  error ("%s only accepts %d arguments", name, (fcode == ALTIVEC_BUILTIN_VEC_PROMOTE)+1 );
>> +	  error ("builtin %qs only accepts %d arguments", name,
>> +		 (fcode == ALTIVEC_BUILTIN_VEC_PROMOTE)+1 );
>> 	  return error_mark_node;
>> 	}
>>       if (fcode == ALTIVEC_BUILTIN_VEC_SPLATS && nargs != 1)
>> 	{
>> -	  error ("%s only accepts 1 argument", name);
>> +	  error ("builtin %qs only accepts 1 argument", name);
>> 	  return error_mark_node;
>> 	}
>>       if (fcode == ALTIVEC_BUILTIN_VEC_PROMOTE && nargs != 2)
>> 	{
>> -	  error ("%s only accepts 2 arguments", name);
>> +	  error ("builtin %qs only accepts 2 arguments", name);
>> 	  return error_mark_node;
>> 	}
> 
> This last "if" is redundant with the handling of VEC_PROMOTE about ten
> lines up.  Maybe the "if (nargs == 0)" should be ordered later and things
> simplified?

Looks to me like it's equivalent to remove the whole "if (nargs == 0) {...}" clause.
I'll regstrap that and commit if it's clean.  Thanks again!

Bill

> 
> Okay with or without making that nicer.
> 
> 
> Segher
>