Kelvin, you don't need fake OMPD_data, instead mark it as OMPD_unknown
and check explicitly that 'data' identifier is expected
Best regards,
Alexey Bataev
=============
Software Engineer
Intel Compiler Team
01.07.2015 18:03, Kelvin Li пишет:
================
Comment at: lib/Parse/ParseOpenMP.cpp:43-55
@@ -42,2 +42,15 @@
: getOpenMPDirectiveKind(P.getPreprocessor().getSpelling(Tok));
+
+ switch (DKind) {
+ case OMPD_target: {
+ auto SavedToken = P.getPreprocessor().LookAhead(0);
+ if (!SavedToken.isAnnotation()) {
+ if (P.getPreprocessor().getSpelling(SavedToken) == "data") {
+ DKind = OMPD_target_data;
+ P.ConsumeToken();
+ }
+ }
+ break;
+ }
+ default:
for (unsigned i = 0; i < llvm::array_lengthof(F); ++i) {
----------------
ABataev wrote:
This code is copied from clang-omp, we're using another solution in official
clang. See the patch for 'declare simd' construct
(http://reviews.llvm.org/D10599)
Perhaps I misunderstand it. The issue of the suggested approach is that it
treats 'data' as a directive in order to have { OMPD_target, OMPD_data,
OMPD_target_data }. Creating a fake OMPD_data may be confusing. That is why I
took this approach.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D10765
EMAIL PREFERENCES
http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
