This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, rs6000] More diagnostic cleanup, addressing PR79845
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:21:17PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> >> 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.
Ah, right, there is an if() around this allowing only these two fcodes.
> I'll regstrap that and commit if it's clean. Thanks again!
No, thank you, this wasn't the most fun work to do ;-)
Segher