On 05/23/2013 11:27 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> Hello Richard et al.,
> Attached, please find a fixed patch. I have done the following changes:
>
> 1. Used the c_finish_loop (...) function instead of building the loop myself
> 2. Got rid of ARRAY_NOTATION_TYPE and just used TREE_TYPE ().
>
> It is passing all the regression tests and not breaking/passing any other
> tests that were not already breaking/passing in the trunk.
Good to know A_N_T wasn't needed. You failed to remove it completely though:
> +/* Array Notation expression.
> + Operand 0 is the array.
> + Operand 1 is the starting array index.
> + Operand 2 contains the number of elements you need to access.
> + Operand 3 is the stride.
> + Operand 4 is the array notation's type. */
> +DEFTREECODE (ARRAY_NOTATION_REF, "array_notation_ref", tcc_reference, 5)
> +@item ARRAY_NOTATION_REF
> +These nodes represent array notation expressions that are part of the
> +Cilk Plus language extensions (enabled by the @option{-fcilkplus}
> +flag). The first operand is the array. The second, third, and fourth
> +operands are the start-index, number of elements accessed (also called
> +length) and the stride, respectively. The fifth operand holds the
> +array type. Near the end of the parsing stage, these array notations
> +are broken up into array references (@code{ARRAY_REF}) enclosed inside
> +a loop iterating from 0 to the number of elements accessed.
> +
This really shouldn't go in generic.texi, because it's not a generic tree code.
AFAIK, we have no texi documentation for the front-end specific stuff.
Otherwise I see nothing wrong with the patch vs compiler proper.
r~
