[PATCH] D68453: TableGen: Allow 'a+b' in TableGen language

[Hal Finkel via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

hfinkel added a comment.

In D68453#1695803 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68453#1695803>, @javed.absar wrote:

> In D68453#1694815 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68453#1694815>, @hfinkel wrote:
>
> > How far down this road can we go? I would like to see infix operators in TableGen because I believe that it will make it easier to use. However, I'm concerned about just adding add as a special case. Of the other similar operators:
> >
> >   case ADD: Result = "!add"; break;
> >   case MUL: Result = "!mul"; break;
> >   case AND: Result = "!and"; break;
> >   case OR: Result = "!or"; break;
> >   case SHL: Result = "!shl"; break;
> >   case SRA: Result = "!sra"; break;
> >   case SRL: Result = "!srl"; break;
> >   case EQ: Result = "!eq"; break;
> >   case NE: Result = "!ne"; break;
> >   case LE: Result = "!le"; break;
> >   case LT: Result = "!lt"; break;
> >   case GE: Result = "!ge"; break;
> >   case GT: Result = "!gt"; break;
> >   
> >
> > how many can we add as infix operators without ambiguities or other difficulties?
>
>
> I have a half baked shunting-algorithm based infix-operator patch to work with cases you mention but that is kind of major work. I thought maybe, as !add is most commonly used, there maybe an appetite for a simple solution like here.


To be clear, I'm fine with taking an incremental approach here. It sounds like you've investigated this and there's no major technical impediment, it's just more complicated (and, thus, a more-complicated patch) to deal with all of the operators. Is that correct?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D68453/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D68453