[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #3 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-13 12:35 --- I've just tried to duplicate the compile time difference with -Wall and found that the -Wall was a red herring -- it always takes 169 minutes to compile our code with gfortran, -Wall or not. This is about 8 times

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread kargl at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu
--- Comment #4 from kargl at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu 2007-01-13 17:23 --- Subject: Re: gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov wrote: Gfortran's compilation time is mainly due to a three routines that take on the order of 1/2

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #5 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-13 21:11 --- Created an attachment (id=12896) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12896action=view) Entire compilation log with -fmem-report -ftime-report turned on The trouble routines are part of the Adjoint

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #6 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-13 21:12 --- Created an attachment (id=12897) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12897action=view) Lakos-style use associations for residual_turbpart.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30367

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #7 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-13 21:13 --- Created an attachment (id=12898) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12898action=view) Lakos-style use associations for residual_turbulent.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30367

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #8 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-13 21:13 --- Created an attachment (id=12899) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12899action=view) Lakos-style use associations for precond_turbpart.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30367

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #9 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-13 21:14 --- Created an attachment (id=12900) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12900action=view) Lakos-style use associations for precond_turbulent.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30367

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #10 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-13 21:17 --- Based on the Lakos-style analysis of the dependencies for these particular routines, it /might/ be possible to supply self-contained source; but it will take a while to check with the powers that be. --

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-13 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #11 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-13 21:28 --- Created an attachment (id=12902) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12902action=view) An excerpt from precond_turbulent.f90 Here's an excerpt from one of the offenders. Note: the module only has a

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-09 Thread Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov
--- Comment #2 from Bil dot Kleb at NASA dot gov 2007-01-09 13:15 --- No warnings with -Wall -- we've been busy cleaning the last few months. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30367

[Bug fortran/30367] gfortran compile times excessive with -Wall

2007-01-08 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-09 06:25 --- Are there a lot of warnings emitted when compiled with -Wall ? or None? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30367