[committed] clean up preprocessor conditional (Re: [PATCH 4/5] distinguish likely and unlikely results (PR 78703))

[Martin Sebor]

I committed the patch below to clean up the "mess."

Thanks
Martin

Index: gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c    (revision 244957)
+++ gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c    (working copy)
@@ -1686,20 +1686,10 @@ format_floating (const directive &dir, tree arg)
        prec[0] = -1;
       if (prec[1] < 0)
        {
-#ifdef HAVE_XFmode
-         /* When L is specified use long double, otherwise double.  */
-         unsigned fmtprec
-           = (dir.modifier == FMT_LEN_L
-              ? REAL_MODE_FORMAT (XFmode)->p
-              : REAL_MODE_FORMAT (DFmode)->p);
-#elif defined HAVE_DFmode
-         /* No long double support, use double precision for both.  */
-         unsigned fmtprec = REAL_MODE_FORMAT (DFmode)->p;
-#else
-         /* No long double or double support.  */
-         unsigned fmtprec = 0;
-#endif
-         /* The precision of the IEEE 754 double format is 53.
+          unsigned fmtprec
+           = REAL_MODE_FORMAT (TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (arg)))->p;
+
+              /* The precision of the IEEE 754 double format is 53.
             The precision of all other GCC binary double formats
             is 56 or less.  */
          prec[1] = fmtprec <= 56 ? 13 : 15;

Thanks
Martin

On 01/26/2017 06:12 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Martin Sebor <mse...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

With this patch all my builds for aarch64/arm failed:
/gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c: In function
‘<unnamed>::fmtresult<unnamed>::format_floating(const<unnamed>::direc
tive&, tree_node*)’:
/gcc/gimple-ssa-sprintf.c:1643: error: ‘XFmode’ was not declared in this
scope

Is this fixed later in the series?

It isn't.  I just reproduced it with an aarch64 cross-compiler so
I hope to be able to fix it quickly.

This actually broke any non-x86 targeted GCC.

Even the current code is wrong:
#ifdef HAVE_XFmode
          /* When L is specified use long double, otherwise double.  */
          unsigned fmtprec
            = (dir.modifier == FMT_LEN_L
               ? REAL_MODE_FORMAT (XFmode)->p
               : REAL_MODE_FORMAT (DFmode)->p);
#elif defined HAVE_DFmode
          /* No long double support, use double precision for both.  */
          unsigned fmtprec = REAL_MODE_FORMAT (DFmode)->p;
#else
          /* No long double or double support.  */
          unsigned fmtprec = 0;
#endif


Shouldn't this be based instead on long_double_type_node instead?
Because different targets might have an option to select different
modes.

So it just becomes something like which simplifies the mess you have currently:
          /* When L is specified use long double, otherwise double.  */
          unsigned fmtprec
            = (dir.modifier == FMT_LEN_L
               ? REAL_MODE_FORMAT (TYPE_MODE (long_double_type_node))->p
               : REAL_MODE_FORMAT (TYPE_MODE ((double_type_node))->p);


Thanks,
Andrew

Martin