Attached patch should fix all issues pointed out in last review. Thanks! Michael
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]>wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Michael Han <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Thanks! I have some inline comments below. > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> Index: utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp > >> =================================================================== > >> --- utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp (revision 172543) > >> +++ utils/TableGen/ClangAttrEmitter.cpp (working copy) > >> @@ -735,6 +735,82 @@ > >> [...] > >> + OS << > >> + " case(" << I << ") : {\n" > >> + " OS << \"" + Prefix.str() + Spelling.str(); > >> + > >> + if (Args.size()) OS << "("; > >> > >> Please only generate parens if there are arguments. This has a > >> semantic impact; for instance, [[noreturn()]] is ill-formed in C++11. > > > > > > This code will not emit the parens if there is no arguments as > Args.size() > > will be zero thus OS << "(" will not be executed. Is there an issue > here? > > Just a lack of caffeine on my part! :) > OK :) > > >> @@ -1044,6 +1105,63 @@ > >> [...] > >> + // We only care about attributes that participate sema checking, so > >> + // skip those attributes that are not able to make their way to > Sema. > >> > >> ... participate *in* Sema checking > >> > >> + if (!R.getValueAsBit("SemaHandler")) > >> + continue; > >> > >> Is this check necessary? > > > > > > I think it is necessary. Attributes with sema handler set to 0 never > made to > > Sema, and as a result no Attr will be constructed for these attributes. > > OK, so we skip the !ASTNode items because there is no Attr subclass on > which to store the spelling index, and we skip the !SemaHandler items > because the parser itself ignores them, so they can't have a spelling. > Makes sense, thanks. > > Presumably that means the check for ASTNode isn't essential? In fact, > we might want to be able to ask an AttributeList for, say, AT_Mode for > its spelling, so perhaps we should drop the ASTNode check? > Agree. The ASTNode check is removed. > > >> + // Each distinct spelling yield an attribute kind. > >> + if (R.getValueAsBit("DistinctSpellings")) { > >> + for (unsigned I = 0; I < Spellings.size(); ++ I) { > >> + OS << > >> + " case AT_" << Spellings[I]->getValueAsString("Name") << ": > >> {\n" > >> + " Index = " << I << ";\n" > >> + " break;\n" > >> + "}\n"; > >> > >> I think all DistinctSpellings spellings should have spelling index 0. > >> > > > > There are many parsed attribute kinds for an attribute with > > DistinctSpellings set to 1, but it is still a single parsed attribute > (and I > > think in fact we only have one attribute with DistinctSpellings set to 1 > in > > clang : the OwnershipAttr) and share a single spelling list that contain > > multiple spellings, with each spelling maps to a source form, so we need > > different indexes here. > > They get different AT_ values but the same Attr subclass? OK, then > this is fine. Thanks! > > >> + OS << " if (Name == \"" > >> + << Spellings[I]->getValueAsString("Name") << "\" && " > >> + << "AttrSyntax == \"" << > >> Spellings[I]->getValueAsString("Variety") > >> + << "\" && Scope == \"" << Namespace << "\")\n" > >> + << " return " << I << ";\n"; > >> > >> Please convert the Variety into the syntax enumeration, rather than > >> converting the syntax value into a string, and compare this first. > >> It'd be great to use a StringSwitch here, too (or even something > >> faster, since we know that one of the syntaxes must match). > >> > > > > Thanks, I'll use the enumeration for now and think about produce faster > code > > here. > The updated patch uses StringSwitch for this. > > > >> > >> Index: lib/Sema/AttributeList.cpp > >> =================================================================== > >> --- lib/Sema/AttributeList.cpp (revision 172543) > >> +++ lib/Sema/AttributeList.cpp (working copy) > >> @@ -125,3 +125,39 @@ > >> > >> return ::getAttrKind(Buf); > >> } > >> + > >> +unsigned AttributeList::getAttributeSpellListIndex() const { > >> > >> getAttributeSpellingListIndex? > >> > >> + switch (SyntaxUsed) { > >> + default : { > >> + llvm_unreachable("Unknown attribute syntax!"); > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + case (AS_GNU) : { > >> + AttrSyntax = "GNU"; > >> + break; > >> + } > >> > >> This should be formatted as: > > > > > > Thanks for pointing this out! I'll kill the curly braces in tablegen > emitted > > code too :) > > > >> > >> switch (SyntaxUsed) { > >> default: > >> llvm_unreachable("Unknown attribute syntax!"); > >> > >> case AS_GNU: > >> AttrSyntax = "GNU"; > >> break; > >> > >> ... but, as noted above, don't do this conversion. > >> > > > > Thanks! > > Michael > > > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Michael Han <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > Cool thanks. Please take a look at attached patch, a brief > description : > >> > - Introduce a new bit field in Attr to store the index into the > spelling > >> > list of each attribute in Attr.td. > >> > - Introduce a new method to AttributeList to generate the index based > on > >> > attribute syntax, name, and scope. > >> > Implementation of this method is generated through table-gen. > >> > - Teach table-gen to print an attribute based on this index. > >> > > >> > Michael > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected] > > > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Michael Han > >> >> <[email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Hi Richard, > >> >>> > >> >>> I think that is a great idea but I am not sure what value to pass to > >> >>> Attr > >> >>> when it's constructed in SemaDeclAttr.cpp. I was hoping to reuse the > >> >>> syntax > >> >>> enumerator value as the spelling list index but it does not work for > >> >>> all > >> >>> cases (e.g. alignment attribute in GNU syntax has two spellings.). > >> >>> > >> >>> Alternatively, at the time we construct an Attr, there is enough > >> >>> information (both the syntax and the actual spelling) we can use to > >> >>> print > >> >>> the attribute in full fidelity. We can pass the spelling string to > the > >> >>> Attr, > >> >>> besides the syntax used as this patch did, so the printer will know > >> >>> which > >> >>> syntax and spelling to select. It would be more elegant to encode > both > >> >>> information as a single index into the spelling list but I haven't > >> >>> figured > >> >>> out how to do that. Any suggestions on this? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> You would need to teach TableGen to emit a function which maps the > >> >> attribute syntax, scope, and name to a spelling index (and to use the > >> >> spelling index when printing the attribute). You can then use that to > >> >> add a > >> >> method to AttributeList to get the spelling index for an attribute. > >> >> > >> >>> > >> >>> Cheers > >> >>> Michael > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Richard Smith < > [email protected]> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Hi, > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Michael Han > >> >>>> <[email protected]> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Hi, > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Attached patch is to fix PR14922. Currently when print an > attribute > >> >>>>> the > >> >>>>> GNU syntax will always be used, even if the attribute has no GNU > >> >>>>> syntax.The > >> >>>>> fix is to pass the syntax flag when constructing the Attr node and > >> >>>>> take that > >> >>>>> into consideration when printing the attribute. The name of actual > >> >>>>> attribute > >> >>>>> gets printed is read from table gen definition file so there is > >> >>>>> still some > >> >>>>> limitations, for example, when an attribute has multiple > spellings, > >> >>>>> the > >> >>>>> first spelling is used; and the namespace of the attribute (in > case > >> >>>>> it's a > >> >>>>> C++11 attribute) is not printed. I test the patch locally in my > >> >>>>> project > >> >>>>> which has access to Clang AST but I am not sure how to write a > stand > >> >>>>> alone > >> >>>>> test to test the attribute pretty print. After this patch gets in > >> >>>>> I'll send > >> >>>>> another patch which updates the SemaDeclAttr to pass the actual > >> >>>>> syntax flag > >> >>>>> from AttributeList to Attr. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I don't think this is the best approach: it still always uses the > >> >>>> first > >> >>>> spelling, so it still won't produce the right string for > >> >>>> __attribute__((aligned(...))) versus __declspec(alignment(...)) > >> >>>> versus > >> >>>> [[gnu::aligned(...)]] versus alignas(...). > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Since we already have a list of possible spellings for an attribute > >> >>>> in > >> >>>> the attribute definition (which incorporates the syntax used), how > >> >>>> about > >> >>>> just storing an index into that list on the Attr? > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > > > > > >
attr-print.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
