ra-debug.c: why?

[Pop Sébastian]

On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 11:30:29AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-07-18 at 07:05, Michael Matz wrote:
> 
> > But I definetely prefer seeing
> > 
> >   4     p59 <= [(h16 + 4)]:DF
> > 
> > compared with
> > 
> > (insn:HI 4 3 5 0 (nil) (set (reg/v:DF 59)
> >         (mem/f:DF (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 16 argp)
> >                 (const_int 4 [0x4])) [3 b+0 S8 A64])) 94 {*movdf_nointeger} (nil)
> >     (nil))
> > 
> Really?  Fantastic!  I've had something like this on my todo list for a
> long time now.
> 
> How hard would it be to make this dumper generic enough so that we could
> have a flag for making *all* RTL dumps using infix notation?
> 
> I find the traditional RTL dump notation extremely irritating and very
> hard to read.  One gets used to it, but it's still annoying.
> 

I'd say that the traditional rtl dumping looks like lisp expressions
(with lot of inutile and stupid parentheses :-)).
After all we're not lisp interpreters :-)

Making gcc's representations hard to read has some historic reason,
but having a pretty printer for rtl could make development and debugging
simpler at rtl level.


Sebastian