[PATCH] D81667: [RFC, FileCheck] Add precision to format specifier
George Rimar via Phabricator via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Tue Aug 11 03:56:43 PDT 2020
grimar added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Support/FileCheck.cpp:86
}
}
----------------
thopre wrote:
> grimar wrote:
> > Perhaps, it might be simpler just to merge switches and write the logic here as:
> >
> >
> > ```
> > Expected<std::string> ExpressionFormat::getWildcardRegex() const {
> > if (Value == Kind::NoFormat)
> > return createStringError(std::errc::invalid_argument,
> > "trying to match value with invalid format");
> > switch (Value) {
> > case Kind::Unsigned:
> > if (Precision)
> > return ("-?([1-9][0-9]*)?[0-9]{" + Twine(Precision) + "}").str();
> > return std::string("[0-9]+");
> > case Kind::Signed:
> > ...
> > default:
> > llvm_unreachable("....");
> > }
> > }
> > ```
> I'm not a big fan of repeating the formatting logic for the Precision case so I've kept that bit as is. What do you think of the result?
I see 2 possible improvements:
1) When you have a dedicated `RegexPrefix` variable, you postpone the return and have to add `break`s everywhere.
If you just do not want to repeat the formatting logic, I'd suggest to add a little helper. E.g:
```
auto CreatePrecisionRegex = [](StringRef S) -> std::string {
return (S + Twine(Precision) + "}").str();
};
switch (Value) {
case Kind::Unsigned:
if (Precision)
return CreatePrecisionRegex("-?([1-9][0-9]*)?[0-9]{");
return std::string("[0-9]+");
default:
llvm_unreachable("ddd");
}
```
The main benefit is that you can return early and avoid having a one more variable.
2) Perhaps it doesn't make much sence to use `createStringError` for the `default` case? It is unreachable now and can't be tested either (I believe).
So I'd either remove the `if (Value == Kind::NoFormat)` block and handle the error in the `default`, like you initially did,
or keep it and switch to using `llvm_unreachable` in `default`.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D81667/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D81667
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list