On 05/15/2017 04:12 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 05/15/2017 09:06 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > >>> Given a blank sheet of paper, the current 'TDF_tree' dumps should really be >>> 'TDF_gimple' dumps, so we'd have lang/ipa/gimple/rtl kinds of dumps. Such a >>> renaming may be an unacceptable amount of churn though. >> >> Well, I would prefer to introduce new enum for kind of dump: >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg01033.html > > Right, I understand that. My point is that it might be confusing to users of > the dump machinery (i.e. me), at the command-line level where 'rtl' means > different things in different contexts. And we have 'tree' dumps that dump > gimple and 'lang' dumps that also (can) dump trees.
Right. To be honest, originally I was convinced about positive impact of hierarchical options. But changing names of dump suboptions will bring inconvenience for current developers of GCC (who mainly use it). And I also noticed that one can write -fdump-tree-ifcvt-stats-blocks-details, a combination of multiple suboptions. Which makes it even more complex :) That said, I'm not inclining to that. Then it's questionable whether to encapsulate masking enum to a class? Martin > > We have a bunch of gimple optimization passes, but call the dumpers 'tree'. > I know how we ended up here, but it seems confusing. > > nathan >
