From: David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
To: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com>
Cc: Oleg Endo <oleg.endo@t-online.de>,
Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc@gmail.com>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Instructions vs Expressions in the backend (was Re: RFA: Rework FOR_BB_INSNS iterators)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 14:35:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1403879554.21706.58.camel@surprise> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bnthgwku.fsf@talisman.default>
On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 10:36 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Oleg Endo <oleg.endo@t-online.de> writes:
> > Personally, I'd like to see usage of standard STL-like iterator usage.
> > I've proposed something for edge_iterator a while ago, but people don't
> > seem very fond of it. See also
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-12/msg01129.html
> >
> > Have you also considered passing the new rtx_* types by value or
> > reference instead of pointer? A long time ago I've quickly put together
> > a class 'rtxx' which was just a pointer wrapper for the rtx_def*
> > (basically the same as I proposed for edge_iterator).
> > I've converted the SH backend code to use it just to see what it would
> > look like. The conversion itself was pretty straight forward -- just
> > replace 'rtx' with 'rtxx'. Appropriate conversion
> > operators/constructors in 'class rtxx' made both interchangeable and
> > allowed co-existence of both and thus step-by-step conversion of the
> > code base.
> > Another advantage of passing around by value/ref is that it allows
> > operator overloading. One use case could be instead of:
> >
> > if (MEM_P (XEXP (x, 0)))
> > *total = address_cost (XEXP (XEXP (x, 0), 0),
> > GET_MODE (XEXP (x, 0)),
> > MEM_ADDR_SPACE (XEXP (x, 0)), true);
> >
> >
> > something like that (overloading operator[]):
> > if (x[0] == rtx_mem::type)
> > *total = address_cost (x[0][0], x[0].mode (),
> > x[0].mem_addr_space (), true);
> >
> > ... where rtx_mem::type would be some type for which 'rtxx' (or whatever
> > the name of the base class is) would provide the according operator
> > ==, != overloads.
>
> I think this is an example of another problem with gcc coding style:
> that we're far too afraid of temporary variables. In David's scheme
> I think this would be:
>
> if (rtx_mem *mem = as_a <rtx_mem *> (XEXP (x, 0)))
> *total = address_cost (XEXP (mem, 0), GET_MODE (mem),
> MEM_ADDR_SPACE (mem), true);
FWIW you want a dyn_cast<> rather than an as_a<> here, giving:
if (rtx_mem *mem = dyn_cast <rtx_mem *> (XEXP (x, 0)))
*total = address_cost (XEXP (mem, 0), GET_MODE (mem),
MEM_ADDR_SPACE (mem), true);
> which with members would become:
>
> if (rtx_mem *mem = as_a <rtx_mem *> (...))
> *total = address_cost (mem->address (), mem->mode (), mem->address_space (),
> true);
(likewise)
> (although if we go down that route, I hope we can add an exception to the
> formatting rule so that no space should be used before "()".)
>
> I suppose with the magic values it would be:
>
> if (rtx_mem mem = as_a <rtx_mem> (x[0]))
> *total = address_cost (mem[0], mem.mode (), mem.address_space (), true);
(likewise).
> but I'm not sure that that would really be more readable.
[...snip...; see my other mail for notes on restricting the scope of the
current patch kit to an insn vs expr separation, for the sake of my
sanity :) ]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-27 14:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-07 17:54 RFA: Rework FOR_BB_INSNS iterators Richard Sandiford
2014-06-07 20:26 ` Steven Bosscher
2014-06-09 19:32 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-06-23 19:01 ` Instructions vs Expressions in the backend (was Re: RFA: Rework FOR_BB_INSNS iterators) David Malcolm
2014-06-23 20:38 ` Oleg Endo
2014-06-25 9:36 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-06-25 20:39 ` Jeff Law
2014-06-27 14:28 ` David Malcolm
2014-06-27 15:38 ` Jeff Law
2014-06-27 7:36 ` Oleg Endo
2014-06-27 14:35 ` David Malcolm [this message]
2014-06-25 8:54 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-06-25 20:46 ` Jeff Law
2014-06-25 21:24 ` Steven Bosscher
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1403879554.21706.58.camel@surprise \
--to=dmalcolm@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=oleg.endo@t-online.de \
--cc=rdsandiford@googlemail.com \
--cc=stevenb.gcc@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).