Re: Location of "dg-final" directives? (was Re: [PATCH][GCC] Algorithmic optimization in match and simplify)

[Andre Vieira <Andre.SimoesDiasVieira@arm.com>]

On 01/09/15 17:54, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 12:50:27PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
>> I can't comment on the patch itself, but I noticed that in the testsuite
>> addition, you've gathered all the "dg-final" clauses at the end.
>>
>> I think that this is consistent with existing practice in gcc, but
>> AFAIK, the dg-final clauses can appear anywhere in the file.
>>
>> Would it make test cases more readable if we put the dg-final clauses
>> next to the code that they relate to?  Or, at least after the function
>> that they relate to?
>>
>> For example:
>>
>>    unsigned short
>>    foo (unsigned short a)
>>    {
>>      a ^= 0x4002;
>>      a >>= 1;
>>      a |= 0x8000; /* Simplify to ((a >> 1) ^ 0xa001).  */
>>      return a;
>>    }
>>    /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "\\^ 40961" "forwprop1" } } */
>>
>>    unsigned short
>>    bar (unsigned short a)
>>    {
>>        /* snip */ /* Simplify to ((a << 1) | 0x8005).  */
>>    }
>>    /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "\\| 32773" "forwprop1" } } */
>>
>>    ... etc ...
>>
>> I think this may be more readable than the "group them all at the end of
>> the file approach", especially with testcases with many files and
>> dg-final directives.
>
> Yeah, it's probably somewhat more readable.  Same for dg-output.  E.g. some
> ubsan tests already use dg-outputs after functions they relate to.
>
> 	Marek
>

If no one objects Ill make those changes too. Sounds reasonable to me.

Andre