aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/gcc
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorDavid Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>2019-09-30 20:03:55 +0000
committerDavid Malcolm <dmalcolm@gcc.gnu.org>2019-09-30 20:03:55 +0000
commit5a05b737e1b626f92ee968f6e32715bf955dae54 (patch)
tree714cd83c7f54b55c831205be869d3c3dd488b5e5 /gcc
parent2f00786128f190a4ad7a0819a84026cd8be19ad4 (diff)
downloadgcc-5a05b737e1b626f92ee968f6e32715bf955dae54.zip
gcc-5a05b737e1b626f92ee968f6e32715bf955dae54.tar.gz
gcc-5a05b737e1b626f92ee968f6e32715bf955dae54.tar.bz2
diagnostic-show-locus.c: rework handling of multiple labels
This patch improves the handling of large numbers of labels within a rich_location: previously, overlapping labels could lead to an assertion failure within layout::print_any_labels. Also, the labels were printed in reverse order of insertion into the rich_location. This patch moves the determination of whether a vertical bar should be printed for a line_label into the 'Figure out how many "label lines" we need, and which one each label is printed in.' step of layout::print_any_labels, rather than doing it as the lines are printed. It also flips the sort order, so that labels at the same line/column are printed in order of insertion into the rich_location. I haven't run into these issues with our existing diagnostics, but it affects a patch kit I'm working on that makes more extensive use of labels. gcc/ChangeLog: * diagnostic-show-locus.c (line_label::line_label): Initialize m_has_vbar. (line_label::comparator): Reverse the sort order by m_state_idx, so that when the list is walked backwards the labels appear in order of insertion into the rich_location. (line_label::m_has_vbar): New field. (layout::print_any_labels): When dealing with multiple labels at the same line and column, only print vertical bars for the one with the highest label_line. (selftest::test_one_liner_labels): Update test for multiple labels to expect the labels to be in the order of insertion into the rich_location. Add a test for many such labels, where the column numbers are out-of-order relative to the insertion order. From-SVN: r276371
Diffstat (limited to 'gcc')
-rw-r--r--gcc/ChangeLog16
-rw-r--r--gcc/diagnostic-show-locus.c75
2 files changed, 78 insertions, 13 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index f665a5c..5c3e3e1 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,19 @@
+2019-09-30 David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
+
+ * diagnostic-show-locus.c (line_label::line_label): Initialize
+ m_has_vbar.
+ (line_label::comparator): Reverse the sort order by m_state_idx,
+ so that when the list is walked backwards the labels appear in
+ order of insertion into the rich_location.
+ (line_label::m_has_vbar): New field.
+ (layout::print_any_labels): When dealing with multiple labels at
+ the same line and column, only print vertical bars for the one
+ with the highest label_line.
+ (selftest::test_one_liner_labels): Update test for multiple labels
+ to expect the labels to be in the order of insertion into the
+ rich_location. Add a test for many such labels, where the column
+ numbers are out-of-order relative to the insertion order.
+
2019-09-30 Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
* config/i386/i386.h (ix86_frame::expensive_p): New field.
diff --git a/gcc/diagnostic-show-locus.c b/gcc/diagnostic-show-locus.c
index 4d563dd..6612cbb6 100644
--- a/gcc/diagnostic-show-locus.c
+++ b/gcc/diagnostic-show-locus.c
@@ -1416,7 +1416,7 @@ public:
line_label (int state_idx, int column, label_text text)
: m_state_idx (state_idx), m_column (column),
m_text (text), m_length (strlen (text.m_buffer)),
- m_label_line (0)
+ m_label_line (0), m_has_vbar (true)
{}
/* Sorting is primarily by column, then by state index. */
@@ -1427,7 +1427,10 @@ public:
int column_cmp = compare (ll1->m_column, ll2->m_column);
if (column_cmp)
return column_cmp;
- return compare (ll1->m_state_idx, ll2->m_state_idx);
+ /* Order by reverse state index, so that labels are printed
+ in order of insertion into the rich_location when the
+ sorted list is walked backwards. */
+ return -compare (ll1->m_state_idx, ll2->m_state_idx);
}
int m_state_idx;
@@ -1435,6 +1438,7 @@ public:
label_text m_text;
size_t m_length;
int m_label_line;
+ bool m_has_vbar;
};
/* Print any labels in this row. */
@@ -1511,8 +1515,8 @@ layout::print_any_labels (linenum_type row)
foo + bar
^ : label line 0
| : label line 1
- label 1 : label line 2
- label 0 : label line 3. */
+ label 0 : label line 2
+ label 1 : label line 3. */
int max_label_line = 1;
{
@@ -1522,7 +1526,15 @@ layout::print_any_labels (linenum_type row)
{
/* Would this label "touch" or overlap the next label? */
if (label->m_column + label->m_length >= (size_t)next_column)
- max_label_line++;
+ {
+ max_label_line++;
+
+ /* If we've already seen labels with the same column, suppress the
+ vertical bar for subsequent ones in this backwards iteration;
+ hence only the one with the highest label_line has m_has_vbar set. */
+ if (label->m_column == next_column)
+ label->m_has_vbar = false;
+ }
label->m_label_line = max_label_line;
next_column = label->m_column;
@@ -1533,10 +1545,6 @@ layout::print_any_labels (linenum_type row)
either a vertical bar ('|') for the labels that are lower down, or the
labels themselves once we've reached their line. */
{
- /* Keep track of in which column we last printed a vertical bar.
- This allows us to suppress duplicate vertical bars for the case
- where multiple labels are on one column. */
- int last_vbar = 0;
for (int label_line = 0; label_line <= max_label_line; label_line++)
{
start_annotation_line ();
@@ -1558,14 +1566,13 @@ layout::print_any_labels (linenum_type row)
m_colorizer.set_normal_text ();
column += label->m_length;
}
- else if (label->m_column != last_vbar)
+ else if (label->m_has_vbar)
{
gcc_assert (column <= label->m_column);
move_to_column (&column, label->m_column, true);
m_colorizer.set_range (label->m_state_idx);
pp_character (m_pp, '|');
m_colorizer.set_normal_text ();
- last_vbar = column;
column++;
}
}
@@ -2783,9 +2790,51 @@ test_one_liner_labels ()
" foo = bar.field;\n"
" ^~~\n"
" |\n"
- " label 2\n"
+ " label 0\n"
" label 1\n"
- " label 0\n",
+ " label 2\n",
+ pp_formatted_text (dc.printer));
+ }
+
+ /* Example of out-of-order ranges (thus requiring a sort), where
+ they overlap, and there are multiple ranges on the same point. */
+ {
+ text_range_label label_0a ("label 0a");
+ text_range_label label_1a ("label 1a");
+ text_range_label label_2a ("label 2a");
+ text_range_label label_0b ("label 0b");
+ text_range_label label_1b ("label 1b");
+ text_range_label label_2b ("label 2b");
+ text_range_label label_0c ("label 0c");
+ text_range_label label_1c ("label 1c");
+ text_range_label label_2c ("label 2c");
+ gcc_rich_location richloc (field, &label_0a);
+ richloc.add_range (bar, SHOW_RANGE_WITHOUT_CARET, &label_1a);
+ richloc.add_range (foo, SHOW_RANGE_WITHOUT_CARET, &label_2a);
+
+ richloc.add_range (field, SHOW_RANGE_WITHOUT_CARET, &label_0b);
+ richloc.add_range (bar, SHOW_RANGE_WITHOUT_CARET, &label_1b);
+ richloc.add_range (foo, SHOW_RANGE_WITHOUT_CARET, &label_2b);
+
+ richloc.add_range (field, SHOW_RANGE_WITHOUT_CARET, &label_0c);
+ richloc.add_range (bar, SHOW_RANGE_WITHOUT_CARET, &label_1c);
+ richloc.add_range (foo, SHOW_RANGE_WITHOUT_CARET, &label_2c);
+
+ test_diagnostic_context dc;
+ diagnostic_show_locus (&dc, &richloc, DK_ERROR);
+ ASSERT_STREQ ("\n"
+ " foo = bar.field;\n"
+ " ~~~ ~~~ ^~~~~\n"
+ " | | |\n"
+ " | | label 0a\n"
+ " | | label 0b\n"
+ " | | label 0c\n"
+ " | label 1a\n"
+ " | label 1b\n"
+ " | label 1c\n"
+ " label 2a\n"
+ " label 2b\n"
+ " label 2c\n",
pp_formatted_text (dc.printer));
}