[PATCH] #pragma vectorize

[Alexey Bataev]

Hello Tyler,
I think that still there are some problems with your patch.
At first, add tests for serialization/deserialization and -ast-print. 
You'll see that at least -ast-print works incorrectly because #pragma 
is represented as a C++11 attribute.
Then, I don't think that it would be possible to fix problem with the 
template instantiation by some incremental patch. IMO, it will require 
some serious redesign of your solution, because template instantiation 
requires AST node, but you're working with the values. You need to pass 
the whole _value_ as a vector of tokens to Parser, which should parse 
this token sequence as an expression to build an Expr AST node.

Best regards,
Alexey Bataev
=============
Software Engineer
Intel Compiler Team
Intel Corp.

30 Апрель 2014 г. 3:00:31, Tyler Nowicki писал:
> +Alexander and Douglas
>
> Sorry you guys dropped off the cc for some reason.
>
> On Apr 29, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Tyler Nowicki <tnowicki at apple.com
> <mailto:tnowicki at apple.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I’ve updated the patch with the FIXME. I’ve also added a separate
>> test for the contradictory pragmas.
>>
>> @Alexander: Since BalancedDelimiterTracker does not have any
>> benefits and just adds unnecessary complexity I opted not to use it.
>>
>> Thanks everyone for your feedback. Please review the updated patch.
>>
>> Tyler
>>
>> <pragma_loop-svn.patch>
>>
>> On Apr 29, 2014, at 11:26 AM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com
>> <mailto:nrotem at apple.com>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 29, 2014, at 11:24 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov
>>> <mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm fine with this as incremental progress, so long as the
>>>> follow-up happens in the near term. Please add a FIXME describing
>>>> what needs to change to support constant expressions (including use
>>>> via template instantiation).
>>>
>>> +1.  I also like the incremental approach, as long as we have
>>> bugzilla PRs to track.
>>
>>
>> On Apr 29, 2014, at 9:17 AM, Alexander Musman
>> <alexander.musman at gmail.com <mailto:alexander.musman at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ParsePragma.cpp:1619: // Read '('
>>> >>> This looks like a good place to use BalancedDelimiterTracker for
>>> parsing '(' and ')’.
>>>
>>> >>I don’t think it is needed. It isn’t used by any other #pragma directives and the syntax here is rather simple. What do you think would be the benefit?
>>>
>>> This would improve consistency with the other places in clang where
>>> '(' and ')' are parsed. Otherwise it seems to be equivalent to
>>> handling '(' and ')' manually.
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-commits mailing list
>> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>