Re: [PATCH] RFC: Use Levenshtein spelling suggestions in Fortran FE

[Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot.nop@gmail.com>]

On 1 December 2015 at 17:41, Steve Kargl
<sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 05:12:57PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On 1 December 2015 at 16:01, Steve Kargl
>> <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 01:55:01PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> >>
>> >> David Malcolm nice Levenshtein distance spelling check helpers
>> >> were used in some parts of other frontends. This proposed patch adds
>> >> some spelling corrections to the fortran frontend.
>>
>> > What problem are you trying to solve here?  The patch looks like
>>
>> The idea is to improve the programmer experience when writing code.
>> See the testcases enclosed in the patch. I consider this a feature :)
>
> Opinions differ.  I consider it unnecessary bloat.

Fair enough.
I fully agree that it's bloat.

The compiler is so tremendously bloated by now anyway that i consider
these couple of kilobyte to have a nice bloat/user friendliness
factor, overall ;)
I can imagine that people code their fortran programs in an IDE (the
bloated variant of an editor, mine is ~20518 bytes of text, no data,
no bss) and IDEs will sooner or later support fixit-hints. Even the
console/terminal users might enjoy to safe them a cycle of opening a
different file, looking up the type/module/etc name and then going
back to the source-file to correct their typo. *I* would welcome that
sometimes for sure :)

>> > unneeded complexity with the result of injecting C++ idioms into
>> > the Fortran FE.
>>
>> What C++ idioms are you referring to? The autovec?
>> AFAIU the light use of C++ in GCC is deemed OK. I see usage of
>> std::swap and std::map in the FE, not to mention the wide-int uses
>> (wi::). Thus we don't have to realloc/strcat but can use vectors to
>> the same effect, just as other frontends, including the C frontend,
>> do.
>> I take it you remember that we had to change all "try" to something
>> C++ friendly. If the Fortran FE meant to opt-out of being compiled
>> with a C++ compiler in the first place, why were all the C++ clashes
>> rewritten, back then? :)
>
> Yes, I know there are other C++ (mis)features within the
> Fortran FE especially in the trans-*.c files.  Those are
> accepted (by some) as necessary evils to interface with
> the ME.  Your patch injects C++ into otherwise perfectly
> fine C code, which makes it more difficult for those with
> no or very limited C++ knowledge to maintain the gfortran.

So you're in favour of using realloc and strcat, ok. I can use that.
Let me see if ipa-icf can replace all the identical tails of the
lookup_*_fuzzy into a common helper.
Shouldn't rely on LTO anyway nor ipa-icf i suppose.

>
> There are currently 806 open bug reports for gfortran.
> AFAIK, your patch does not address any of those bug reports.

I admit i didn't look..

> The continued push to inject C++ into the Fortran FE will
> have the (un)intentional consequence of forcing at least one
> active gfortran contributor to stop.

That was not my intention for sure.

cheers,