On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 11:04 PM Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 06:49:10PM +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > It has been suggested that if we start bumping numbers by an ULP when
> > calculating open ranges (for example the numbers less than 3.0) that
> > dumping these will become increasingly harder to read, and instead we
> > should opt for the hex representation.  I still find the floating
> > point representation easier to read for most numbers, but perhaps we
> > could have both?
> >
> > With this patch this is the representation for [15.0, 20.0]:
> >
> >      [frange] float [1.5e+1 (0x0.fp+4), 2.0e+1 (0x0.ap+5)]
> >
> > Would you find this useful, or should we stick to the hex
> > representation only (or something altogether different)?
>
> I think dumping both is the way to go, but real_to_hexadecimal doesn't
> do anything useful with decimal floats, so that part should be
> guarded on !DECIMAL_FLOAT_TYPE_P (type).

Remember that decimal floats are not supported for frange, but I
suppose it's good form to guard the print for when we do.

>
> Why do you build a tree + dump_generic_node for decimal instead of
> real_to_decimal_for_mode ?

Honestly, cause I was too lazy.  That code is inherited from irange
and I figured it's just a dumping routine, but I'm happy to fix it.

> The former I think calls:
>             char string[100];
>             real_to_decimal (string, &d, sizeof (string), 0, 1);
> so perhaps:
>   char s[100];
>   real_to_decimal_for_mode (s, &r, sizeof (string), 0, 1, TYPE_MODE (type));
>   pp_string (pp, "%s", s);
>   if (!DECIMAL_FLOAT_TYPE_P (type))
>     {
>       real_to_hexadecimal (s, &r, sizeof (s), 0, 1);
>       pp_printf (pp, " (%s)", s);
>     }
> ?

Thanks.

I'm retesting the following and will commit if it succeeds since we
seem to have overwhelming consensus :).
Aldy