[tree-ssa] Simple out of ssa diagnostics

[Daniel Berlin]

On Thursday, June 12, 2003, at 05:45  PM, Diego Novillo wrote:

> On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 17:41, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
>> So if you want to take this tack, I would change it to an abort, and
>> hope that its never a valid thing someone puts in... We could deal 
>> with
>> it then I guess.
>>
> I'd rather have an abort(), yes.  It's easier to debug if the
> compilation can't procede.
>
>> So do you want me to change it from 'debug' to 'detail2' ?? :-) Or I 
>> can
>> simply put it under DETAIL.. I just think its more than some people 
>> will
>> want to see normally.... but Im pretty ambivilant about it.  I just 
>> want
>> to stop modifying my code base to do my debugging.
>>
> Let's do something.  Put it in -detail and let's think about having
> different verbosity levels.  I really want us to have your diagnostic
> code in the tree.
>

Am the only one who is getting a bit tired of having to write 
-fdump-tree-pre-details-vops-blocks 
-fdump-tree-optimized-details-vops-blocks 
-fdump-tree-ccp-details-vops-blocks all the time?

We should at least come up with a way to specify the default tree dump 
options so i can do something like

-ftdopts=details-vops-blocks -fdump-tree-ccp -fdump-tree-pre 
-fdump-tree-optimized

Seems like it should be possible, since the flags just get converted to 
a standard set of dump flag enums anyway (IE TDF_DETAILS, TDF_VOPS), so 
a simple variable holding the default dump flags and |'ing it with each 
dump option we see should do it.

This way would even let you do
-ftdopts=vops -fdump-tree-ssa -ftdopts=details-blocks-vops 
-fdump-tree-pre

and have it work right.

If this sounds okay, i'll implement it (choose a good name if you don't 
like tdopts)
> Diego.
>