[flang-commits] [PATCH] D89879: [Flang][OpenMP-5.0] Semantic checks for flush construct.

[sameeran joshi via Phabricator via flang-commits]

sameeranjoshi added a comment.

Thank you!



================
Comment at: flang/test/Semantics/omp-flush01.f90:28
+    !ERROR: expected end of line
+    !$omp flush acq_rel acq_rel
+    !ERROR: expected end of line
----------------
clementval wrote:
> sameeranjoshi wrote:
> > clementval wrote:
> > > sameeranjoshi wrote:
> > > > clementval wrote:
> > > > > Why is the error reported twice here? Would it not be nicer to have a list of `memory-order-clause` and then the error being reported by the semantic check? I mean it would be more user friendly. 
> > > > It's a known issue due the improper error recovery in openmp.
> > > > omp-atomic.f90 file too had to get a workaround using the same way.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, I have forwarded the errors to semantic phase.
> > > If you have forwarded the errors to semantic then why is there still two syntax error lines? 
> > The errors forwarded to semantics are something like
> > `At most one XYZ clause can appear on the FLUSH directive`.
> > Generally the ones which don't have clauses apart from `memory-order-clause`.
> > 
> > The test cases over here have clauses which don't fall under `memory-order-clause`, hence the parser becomes very stricter over here and catches them in parsing stage.
> Ok I see. It would be nice to fix the double reporting of error here but I guess it can be done in a separate patch. Can you add an entry in the progress document to not forget this issue. 
Kiran Kumar from AMD was looking into improving the error messages for OMP parts.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D89879/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D89879