[wasm] Fix the --wasm_code_fuzzer_gen_test again.

src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc

Index: src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc
diff --git a/src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc b/src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc
index 00612b8fde5ef0ccce3eb1b072a18e2f9ef0b2cb..6f8e24ca370a4419b3492ddbeece57359a0405db 100644
--- a/src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc
+++ b/src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc
@@ -1881,14 +1881,25 @@ unsigned OpcodeLength(const byte* pc, const byte* end) {
 
 void PrintWasmCodeForDebugging(const byte* start, const byte* end) {
   AccountingAllocator allocator;
-  OFStream os(stdout);
-  PrintWasmCode(&allocator, FunctionBodyForTesting(start, end), nullptr, os,
-                nullptr);
+  PrintWasmCode(&allocator, FunctionBodyForTesting(start, end), nullptr, true);
+}
+
+const char* OpcodeNameForDebugging(WasmOpcode opcode) {

[titzer, 2017/01/25 10:31:06]

RawOpcodeName?

[ahaas, 2017/01/25 13:12:10]

Done.

+  switch (opcode) {
+#define DECLARE_NAME_CASE(name, opcode, sig) \
+  case kExpr##name:                          \
+    return "kExpr" #name;
+    FOREACH_OPCODE(DECLARE_NAME_CASE)
+#undef DECLARE_NAME_CASE
+    default:
+      break;
+  }
+  return "Unknown";
 }
 
 bool PrintWasmCode(AccountingAllocator* allocator, const FunctionBody& body,

[titzer, 2017/01/25 10:31:06]

I'd be OK with just renaming this method to PrintRawWasmCode and dropping the
boolean parameter.

[ahaas, 2017/01/25 13:12:10]

Done.

-                   const wasm::WasmModule* module, std::ostream& os,
-                   std::vector<std::tuple<uint32_t, int, int>>* offset_table) {
+                   const wasm::WasmModule* module, bool for_debugging) {
+  OFStream os(stdout);
   Zone zone(allocator, ZONE_NAME);
   WasmFullDecoder decoder(&zone, module, body);
   int line_nr = 0;
@@ -1937,16 +1948,17 @@ bool PrintWasmCode(AccountingAllocator* allocator, const FunctionBody& body,
     if (opcode == kExprElse) control_depth--;
 
     int num_whitespaces = control_depth < 32 ? 2 * control_depth : 64;
-    if (offset_table) {
-      offset_table->push_back(
-          std::make_tuple(i.pc_offset(), line_nr, num_whitespaces));
-    }
 
     // 64 whitespaces
     const char* padding =
         "                                                                ";
     os.write(padding, num_whitespaces);
-    os << "k" << WasmOpcodes::OpcodeName(opcode) << ",";
+
+    if (for_debugging) {
+      os << OpcodeNameForDebugging(opcode) << ",";
+    } else {
+      os << "k" << WasmOpcodes::OpcodeName(opcode) << ",";

[Clemens Hammacher, 2017/01/24 18:51:02]

Why is this outputting a "k" in front of the new opcode name? Is anyone actually
using this with for_debugging==false? If not, then just remove the boolean
parameter.

[titzer, 2017/01/25 10:31:06]

Right, the k shouldn't be necessary.

[ahaas, 2017/01/25 13:12:10]

As suggested I changed the output to
    os << RawOpcodeName(opcode) << ",";
now.

+    }
 
     for (size_t j = 1; j < length; ++j) {
       os << " 0x" << AsHex(i.pc()[j], 2) << ",";