Re: [PATCH] v2: Add targetm.libm_function_max_error

[Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 12:29:58PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 10:34:59AM +0000, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> OK. As said the patch itself looks good to me, let's go ahead.  We
> >> have plenty of time to backtrack until GCC 14.
> >
> > Thanks.  Unfortunately when I started using it, I've discovered that the
> > CASE_CFN_xxx_ALL macros don't include the CFN_xxx cases, just
> > CFN_BUILT_IN_xxx* cases.
> >
> > So here is an updated version of the patch I'll bootstrap/regtest tonight
> > which instead uses CASE_CFN_xxx: CASE_CFN_xxx_FN:
> 
> Shouldn't we change something in that case?  The point of these macros
> is to wrap things up a single easy-to-use name, so something feels wrong
> if we're having to use a repeated pattern like this.

Maybe.  But unfortunately not all builtins have those CFN_xxx enumerators,
some have just CFN_BUILT_IN_xxx{,L,F}, otherwise have
CFN_BUILT_IN_xxx{,L,F,F16,F32,F64,F128} and others have that plus CFN_xxx.
So we'd perhaps need some other macros for the all but CFN_xxx and perhaps
use ALL only for the cases where it is really all of them.

	Jakub