[PATCH] Add support for unroll pragma
aaron.ballman at gmail.com
Wed Jul 9 11:16:59 PDT 2014
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Mark Heffernan <meheff at google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Aaron Ballman <aaron.ballman at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I wonder how horrible it would be to simply canonicalize based on
>> compiler options when pretty printing, and skip this field entirely.
>> Eg) when CUDA is on, pretty print does not emit the parens. When CUDA
>> mode is off, it does emit the parens. Yes, this isn't *exactly* what
>> the user wrote, but the semantics are identical either way.
> It would be nice to get rid of the ValueInParens ugliness. One idea
> might be to consider the form with parentheses an error when compiling
> for cuda and the form without parentheses an error when compiling for
> !cuda. Then the parentheses can be emitted based only on whether cuda
> mode is enabled and we don't have to worry about the pragmas being
> silently transformed from one form to the other when printing out the
That would work, but it would be at the expense of the user's
experience (and some compatibility with other compilers). I guess my
question really boils down to whether pretty printing is important
enough to warrant this sort of hackiness, and I don't think it is (we
have other, existing pretty printing issues which I think are of
higher priority). Richard, do you have thoughts or ideas?
More information about the cfe-commits