DCH writes:
> Hi Andrew et alumni,
>
> At 08:57 13/03/2007, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >DCH writes:
> >
> > > Forgive me if I've missed something obvious, but does anyone
> > > know if the output from -fdump-tree-all is documented somewhere?
> >
> >It's C, more or less, except for a few additions such as Phi nodes.
>
> I guess that means no :-) Looks nothing like C to me, but there again
> I'm used to looking a normal type C, not some kind of parsed C.
Oh, you mean the front end dump. Most of the dumps look like this:
() (D.779)
{
struct * #ref#1#2.24;
{
struct * D.782;
void *[<unknown>] * D.784;
void * #ref#0#0;
struct * D.786;
void * #ref#1#2;
... etc.
Only _one_ of the dumps looks like the one below, and that's the
original translation unit.
> Well, most of it really. Basically someone posted this to ACCU-general
> a while ago:
>
> ====================================================
> struct no_default_ctor {
> no_default_ctor(int i) : m_i(i) { };
> ~no_default_ctor() { };
> private:
> no_default_ctor();
> const int m_i;
> };
>
> // Why is `no_default_ctor(Anint)' below a syntax error?
>
> const int Anint = 3;
> int foo() {
> no_default_ctor name(Anint); // This works.
> no_default_ctor(Anint); // This gives me a syntax error.
> no_default_ctor(3); // But this does not.
> (no_default_ctor)(Anint); // And neither does this.
> }
> ====================================================
>
> It provoked some discussion, the outcome of that was rather
> unclear. I thought at least I could pass it into GCC to see how
> no_default_ctor(Anint) is parsed and got the following output. I
> think I decided at the time that it was being interpreted as a
> function-style cast, but then I wasn't sure, and now I can't even
> see that for some reason. There was some discussion if it was a
> cast or a declaration. There are a couple of references in the
> output below to line 13 but I don't know the syntax here to unwind
> it.
>
> ;; Function int foo() (_Z3foov)
> ;; enabled by -fdump-tree-original
>
> @1 function_decl name: @2 mngl: @3 type: @4
> srcp: ctors_orig.cpp:12 extern
> body: @5
> @2 identifier_node strg: foo lngt: 3
> @3 identifier_node strg: _Z3foov lngt: 7
> @4 function_type size: @6 algn: 64 retn: @7
> prms: @8
> @5 compound_stmt line: 17 body: @9
> @6 integer_cst type: @10 low : 64
> @7 integer_type name: @11 size: @12 algn: 32
> prec: 32 min : @13 max : @14
> @8 tree_list valu: @15
> @9 scope_stmt line: 12 begn clnp
> next: @16
> @10 integer_type name: @17 size: @6 algn: 64
> prec: 36 unsigned min : @18
> max : @19
Each one of these is a tree node, and links are replaced by numbers of
the form @N. After that, it's just tree nodes. Most of the meaning
of these nodes is documented in gcc/tree.def, but a few nodes are
language-specific and are documented in the language front ends.
> Is this clear to anyone? Is there a doc somewhere which tells me
> how to read this output?
Andrew.
