Chris Dodd

> @ChrisDodd seems `annotation-likely.p4-stderr` requires an update. And it seems some warnings are still produced? Yes, I only disabled the warning for an always taken `@unlikely` branch. It still warns...

> > Perhaps both these warnings should be in their own warning class that defaults to off, but can be turned on with an appropriate -Wwarn option > > Looks...

I've added the ability to use `@command_line` annotations to add command-line args in test cases, so this case actually be tested

> The other failures is caused by this line > > https://github.com/p4lang/p4c/blob/c67d1fd01f598ccf9ee9ec115d5901ac799f97be/backends/p4tools/modules/testgen/targets/tofino/test/p4-programs/tna_simple_switch.p4#L33 > > This is also not a supported option for P4Testgen but the pragma is still parsed as...

I modified `P4COptionPragmaParser` so that targets can decide whether or not they want to support `@command_line` option pragmas -- most real targets probably want to, but special targets like p4testgen...

> Will be able to review the `action_run` pass later this week. But I'd suggest to split out the changes to `P4COptionPragmaParser` into a PR we can discuss separately. I...

> Could you remove the code that is related to #5123. Or do you want to rebase it on top of that PR? > It requires that PR (for the...

It does require the explicit `const` -- that allows the folding to happen directly without any dataflow analysis to prove that there are no intervening assignments to the variable.

Ugh, this is nasty. I think the spec was written to embody what is easily implementable in the compiler, but this is getting tough. The problem is that we don't...

> Would be great to show the utility with one of the existing parametrized tests. > https://github.com/p4lang/p4c/blob/main/backends/p4test/CMakeLists.txt#L118 I added a `@command_line` to these tests (and checked that the result matches),...