On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 09:08:35AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> 2021-03-04 Richard Biener <[email protected]>
>
> PR middle-end/97855
> * tree-pretty-print.c: Poison pp_printf.
> (dump_decl_name): Avoid use of pp_printf.
> (dump_block_node): Likewise.
> (dump_generic_node): Likewise.
> char c = TREE_CODE (node) == CONST_DECL ? 'C' : 'D';
> + pp_character (pp, c);
> + pp_character (pp, uid_sep);
> if (flags & TDF_NOUID)
> - pp_printf (pp, "%c.xxxx", c);
> + pp_string (pp, "xxxx");
> else
> - pp_printf (pp, "%c%c%u", c, uid_sep, DECL_UID (node));
> + pp_decimal_int (pp, (int) DECL_UID (node));
I think it would be better if this patch didn't change behavior.
So yes, pp_decimal_int is ok for previous %d or %i, but %u
should be done with
pp_scalar (pp, "%u", DECL_UID (node));
(or pp_unsigned_wide_integer (pp, DECL_UID (node));).
> }
> }
> if ((flags & TDF_ALIAS) && DECL_PT_UID (node) != DECL_UID (node))
> {
> if (flags & TDF_NOUID)
> - pp_printf (pp, "ptD.xxxx");
> + pp_string (pp, "ptD.xxxx");
> else
> - pp_printf (pp, "ptD.%u", DECL_PT_UID (node));
> + {
> + pp_string (pp, "ptD.");
> + pp_decimal_int (pp, (int) DECL_PT_UID (node));
Ditto here, pp_scalar (pp, "%u", DECL_PT_UID (node));
> @@ -2165,9 +2207,16 @@ dump_generic_node (pretty_printer *pp, tree node, int
> spc, dump_flags_t flags,
> else
> {
> if (flags & TDF_GIMPLE)
> - pp_printf (pp, "<D%u>", DECL_UID (node));
> + {
> + pp_character (pp, 'D');
> + pp_decimal_int (pp, (int) DECL_UID (node));
Here too.
> + }
> else
> - pp_printf (pp, "<D.%u>", DECL_UID (node));
> + {
> + pp_string (pp, "<D.");
> + pp_decimal_int (pp, (int) DECL_UID (node));
And here.
> + pp_character (pp, '>');
> + }
> }
> }
> break;
> @@ -3021,9 +3070,12 @@ dump_generic_node (pretty_printer *pp, tree node, int
> spc, dump_flags_t flags,
> pp_string (pp, ", ivdep");
> break;
> case annot_expr_unroll_kind:
> - pp_printf (pp, ", unroll %d",
> - (int) TREE_INT_CST_LOW (TREE_OPERAND (node, 2)));
> - break;
> + {
> + pp_string (pp, ", unroll ");
> + pp_decimal_int (pp,
> + (int) TREE_INT_CST_LOW (TREE_OPERAND (node, 2)));
> + break;
> + }
> case annot_expr_no_vector_kind:
> pp_string (pp, ", no-vector");
> break;
> @@ -3205,7 +3257,8 @@ dump_generic_node (pretty_printer *pp, tree node, int
> spc, dump_flags_t flags,
> dump_generic_node (pp, CHREC_LEFT (node), spc, flags, false);
> pp_string (pp, ", +, ");
> dump_generic_node (pp, CHREC_RIGHT (node), spc, flags, false);
> - pp_printf (pp, "}_%u", CHREC_VARIABLE (node));
> + pp_string (pp, "}_");
> + pp_decimal_int (pp, (int)CHREC_VARIABLE (node));
And here.
Ok with those changes if it passes testing.
Jakub
