[DOC] : Remove wrong explanation w.r.t. const handling for predicates, defined with define_predicate

Submitted by Uros Bizjak on Nov. 10, 2011, 8:11 p.m.


Message ID CAFULd4a_LoV1F1xkvP2FfHVtFnFu9NTRfsTx3kNLiKf4UtwOrg@mail.gmail.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Uros Bizjak Nov. 10, 2011, 8:11 p.m.

Predicates, defined with "define_predicate" do not handle CONST_INT
and CONST_DOUBLE operands at all, let alone provide any sort of
special bypass for them. Just remove wrong text to save some poor soul
from tripping this trap in the future.

2011-11-10  Uros Bizjak  <ubizjak@gmail.com>

	* doc/md.texi (Defining Machine-Specific Predicates): Remove wrong
	explanation that predicates written with "define_predicate" provide
	special handling of CONST_INT and CONST_DOUBLE operands.

Tested by "make doc" in gcc directory.

OK for mainline SVN ?


Patch hide | download patch | download mbox

Index: doc/md.texi
--- doc/md.texi	(revision 181258)
+++ doc/md.texi	(working copy)
@@ -1001,16 +1001,7 @@ 
 Predicates written with @code{define_predicate} automatically include
 a test that @var{mode} is @code{VOIDmode}, or @var{op} has the same
-mode as @var{mode}, or @var{op} is a @code{CONST_INT} or
-@code{CONST_DOUBLE}.  They do @emph{not} check specifically for
-integer @code{CONST_DOUBLE}, nor do they test that the value of either
-kind of constant fits in the requested mode.  This is because
-target-specific predicates that take constants usually have to do more
-stringent value checks anyway.  If you need the exact same treatment
-of @code{CONST_INT} or @code{CONST_DOUBLE} that the generic predicates
-provide, use a @code{MATCH_OPERAND} subexpression to call
-@code{const_int_operand}, @code{const_double_operand}, or
+mode as @var{mode}.
 Predicates written with @code{define_special_predicate} do not get any
 automatic mode checks, and are treated as having special mode handling