Add restriction on loop construct associated with DO CONCURRENT. Add couple of tests to ensure
clause validity checks.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Unit Tests
Event Timeline
The tests look good, just a few comments/queries?
I am really not familiar with canonicalization, but I could grasp what's defined in this patch.
flang/lib/Semantics/canonicalize-acc.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
68 | If that's a restriction why is this not in the form of a semantic error message? | |
87 | Which standard ? | |
99 | A C++ beginners query - | |
102 | nit:Was that or instead of and ? |
flang/lib/Semantics/canonicalize-acc.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
68 | The error message is issued in CheckDoConcurrentClauseRestriction in case there is a tile clause associated. Here we just bypass the logic and we do not issue the message a second time. | |
87 | From no one all reference are from 3.1. Right now it's like a transition phase until patch D92120 is approved and landed. | |
99 | std::holds_alternative would be fine in this case. I'll update the patch. Thx. | |
102 | I just use the text from the standard. or would work as well. |
flang/lib/Semantics/canonicalize-acc.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
87 | From now on ... and not "no one"! |
Thanks for clarifications.
Approving it just take care of the build issue before merging.
LGTM.
flang/lib/Semantics/canonicalize-acc.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
99 | Please check syntax this doesn't build. |
flang/lib/Semantics/canonicalize-acc.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
99 | Thanks for catching this. Don't know what I did with this :-) |
If that's a restriction why is this not in the form of a semantic error message?