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

[Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>]

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?

Okay with or without making that nicer.


Segher