[PATCH] D72425: [OptRemark] RFC: Introduce a message table for OptRemarks

[Andrei Elovikov via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

a.elovikov added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/test/TableGen/opt-remark-diag.td:20
+
+// CHECK-ENUMS: enum OptRemarkDiagGroup_Test1 {
+// CHECK-ENUMS:   RemarkName = 10000,
----------------
thegameg wrote:
> What would be the use case of these enums? Can't the same be achieved by not quoting `RemarkName` and `Test1` in the `OPT_REMARK(` macros like in `clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.h`:
> 
> ```
> enum ID {
>     OPT_INVALID = 0, // This is not an option ID.
> #define OPTION(PREFIX, NAME, ID, KIND, GROUP, ALIAS, ALIASARGS, FLAGS, PARAM,  \
>                HELPTEXT, METAVAR, VALUES)                                      \
>   OPT_##ID,
> #include "clang/Driver/Options.inc"
>     LastOption
> #undef OPTION
>   };
> ```
I'm more interested in what other use-cases for OPT_REMARKs are. I believe C++ macros and tablegen serve the same purpose so I'm not sure if it's beneficial to use both at the same time. On the other hand, I want to extend the .td description of remarks to simple statistics so that each remark will be something like "number of <smth>: X" and auto-generate most of the code for handling it. I.e., given


```
  let Group = StatisticsFoo in {
    def remark_statistic_one : OptRemark<"StatisticOne", "Number of EventOne: %{Arg}>;
    def remark_statistic_two : OptRemark<"StatisticTwo", "Number of EventTwo: %{Arg}>;
  }

```
I'd like to be able to generate


```
  struct StatisticsFooStorage {
    NumStatisticOne = 0;
    NumStatisticTwo = 0;

    void emit(RemarkEmitter Emitter) {
      Emitter.emit(StatisticOneRemarkString.format(NumStatisticOne);
      Emitter.emit(StatisticTwoRemarkString.format(NumStatisticTwo);
    }
  }
```

And actual optizmiation

```
StatisticsFooStorage StatStorage;
// ...
if (something)
  ++StatStorage.NumStatisticOne;
//
RemarksEmitter Emitter;
StatStorage.emit(Emitter);
```

I think writing direct tblgen emitter for this might be easier than using the OPT_REMARK macros (although that would probably be doable as well).


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D72425/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D72425