--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 04:09
---
Subject: Bug 38285
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Dec 5 04:07:45 2008
New Revision: 142455
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142455
Log:
2008-12-04 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 04:12
---
Subject: Bug 38285
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Dec 5 04:11:28 2008
New Revision: 142456
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142456
Log:
2008-12-04 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 05:03
---
Fixed on trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 05:39
---
The alternating error was an artefact of the test case and not part of the bug.
I have submitted a fixed patch that eliminates the incorrect EOF error. I
will commit soon.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 05:46
---
That got me farther. Now this:
gnu-make[3]: Entering directory `/home/delisle/gcc/obj44/gcc'
/home/delisle/gcc/obj44/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/delisle/gcc/obj44/./prev-gcc/
-B/home/delisle/gcc/usr/i386-pc
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-04 05:32
---
I am holding off on committing the patch.
With this test case I have found a nasty problem:
! { dg-do run }
! PR38291 Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*
character(15) :: sAccess
character(1) :: instr
open(50
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-03 04:06
---
Eric,
Here is the problem I am seeing:
gcc -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wcast-qual -Wold-style-definition
-Wc++-compat -Wmissing
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 16:32
---
So the read statement by itself is invalid.
???
I was testing with and without the open statement in the test case and saw that
we were not catching that error either. Regardless, the problem is that I
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 03:41
---
I meant elusive in the sense that we have not found the actual cause. We are
only seeing a symptom. I have seen a memory leak on x86-64 and segfault on
PPC64-linux. That was quite some time ago.
--
http
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 05:35
---
Patch submitted. There is ABI breakage with 4.3 in that patch I noticed after
I submitted, so I am now testing some tweaks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38291
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 02:11
---
Try this:
gdb --args f951 parameter_array_init_3.f90
r
bt
My experiance with this bug is that it segfaults at a place away from where the
actual bug is. This one has been very very elusive.
--
http
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 03:55
---
read( 50, *, pos = 1 )
is valid only if the unit has been connected for STREAM access. F2003
9.5.1.10POS= specifier in a data transfer statement
The POS= specifier specifies the file position in file
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-28 19:58
---
Thanks for report. We have it on the list already and i am working on it.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38285 ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-28 19:58
---
*** Bug 38305 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-27 14:20
---
I am on it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-27 14:21
---
I will see what I can do.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 03:53
---
I have been given access to a mchine with this architecture and have not, after
several evenings at it, been able to complete a single build of gfortran. I
notice some instructions on the gcc web page about some
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 03:59
---
Un assigning myself since I think Janne is working on this and I would hate to
duplicate effort. If I need to pick back up on this, let me know.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #15 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 04:05
---
Not a gfortran frontend issue, so closing.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-25 02:18
---
We did at one time talk about innoculating libgfortran or some such so that the
alignments would be maintained. IIRC We decided not too when it was realized
that we would have to manually adjust every time we
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-25 02:35
---
I will regression test on x86-64-gnu-linux and approve if it passes.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37319
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-25 05:57
---
Subject: Bug 37803
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Nov 25 05:55:55 2008
New Revision: 142187
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142187
Log:
2008-11-24 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-25 06:23
---
Fixed on trunk
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 04:37
---
I will see if we can get this cleaned up.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 05:21
---
The PENDING= specifier needs to be a pointer to integer. It is used to assign
a logical value of TRUE or FALse to the variable given value.
Thus:
LOGICAL :: alogicalvalue
INQUIRE(10,pending = alogicalvalue
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 05:34
---
I think this is then a dup of 37754. Janne is working some ideas and these are
similar to my thoughts. This fix here is in a high bug domain so we think we
should hold for 4.5, get it resolved and tested
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 05:34
---
*** Bug 38199 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 04:14
---
Regarding comment #2. This is exactly the area I have been investigating, but
I don't have anything solid yet.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38199
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 04:31
---
Subject: Bug 37472
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Nov 21 04:29:54 2008
New Revision: 142079
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142079
Log:
2008-11-20 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 04:36
---
Subject: Bug 37472
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Nov 21 04:35:17 2008
New Revision: 142080
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142080
Log:
2008-11-20 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 04:38
---
The above patch only fixes a portion of this bug. The remaining is I have not
been able to see the problem yet. I have access to a solaris machine now,
but have not been able to build gfortran yet
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 05:23
---
From some experiments I have done, we can make substantial improvement by
streamlining next_char. What I have in mind is reading a whole or partial
block of a file and returning a pointer. Then advancing
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-20 02:38
---
Sounds like it's fixed.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #29 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 03:02
---
Steve, I will try but we also still have the issue of 38122 as well.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32784
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 16:13
---
Subject: Bug 38097
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Nov 16 16:12:16 2008
New Revision: 141919
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141919
Log:
2008-11-16 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 16:20
---
Subject: Bug 38097
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Nov 16 16:18:36 2008
New Revision: 141920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141920
Log:
2008-11-16 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 16:22
---
Fixed on trunk
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 05:03
---
The shifting of the decimal point between 1000. and 1001. is an artefact of how
we compute the format specifiers in the OUTPUT_FLOAT macro in write_float.def.
I am working on a solution to that part
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 14:58
---
Well I managed to read that thread about 90% through without falling to sleep.
One point made there is that gfortran should not reposition the file after a
reopen as the default position= specifier should
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 19:27
---
Subject: Bug 37294
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 15 19:25:35 2008
New Revision: 141892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141892
Log:
2008-11-15 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 19:34
---
Subject: Bug 37294
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 15 19:33:07 2008
New Revision: 141893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141893
Log:
2008-11-15 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 19:39
---
Fixed on trunk. I will open a new PR for enhancement of this to better utilize
the internal unit array by doing fewer newlines for namelists.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 20:51
---
As far as I can tell, ASIS is working correctly with gfortran 4.4 and 4.3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38122
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 05:05
---
Subject: Bug 37988
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 15 05:03:56 2008
New Revision: 141879
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141879
Log:
2008-11-14 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 05:15
---
Subject: Bug 37988
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 15 05:14:33 2008
New Revision: 141880
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141880
Log:
2008-11-14 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 05:16
---
Fixed on trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-14 04:33
---
I am on it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-13 06:06
---
A patch has been submitted for review.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37294
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-11 05:28
---
Closing, not a bug any more.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-09 18:18
---
After doing some more testing and comparing g77 vs gfortran, gfortran actually
provides higher resolution 1000 ticks/sec then g77 100 ticks/second on at least
my platform (x86-64-linux) On Cygwin, results
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-10 03:16
---
If you check, the minimum size of count is 8 as returned by the size= argument
if you use it. Try this. size is intent OUT.
PROGRAM sort1
INTEGER Count(1) !Current value of system clock
integer Size
CALL
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-09 07:46
---
According to the g77 documentation, system_clock uses the times(2) function.
gfortran uses either the time(2) (note no 's' on the end of the name) or the
gettimeofday function. When I revise the gfortran
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-03 02:17
---
I will add this to my list and see if we can get to what g77 does.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 12:17
---
Steve, if I knew how to fix this, I would have done so by now. I plan to
remove st43 and st44 in 4.5, this was merely a bandaid for the ABI breakage.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #17 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 12:21
---
Jack, did this problem go away on Darwin?
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 12:47
---
Confirmed. On trunk R 141238. I can't get a very usable backtrace on this.
Maybe valgind will give us a hint on Linux box. This could also be a
Cygwin.dll issue.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 12:57
---
Confirmed on recent trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 15:13
---
Closing, thanks for patch.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 16:32
---
I will attend to this if you dont beat me to it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 16:39
---
Are you trying to make from within the source directory?
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #30 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 16:43
---
Subject: Bug 19925
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 1 16:42:31 2008
New Revision: 141518
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141518
Log:
2008-11-01 Steven G. Kargl [EMAIL PROTECTED
--- Comment #31 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 17:02
---
Subject: Bug 19925
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Nov 1 17:00:49 2008
New Revision: 141519
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141519
Log:
2008-11-01 Steven G. Kargl [EMAIL PROTECTED
--- Comment #32 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 17:07
---
Finally, I hope. :)
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-31 04:46
---
Subject: Bug 37930
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Oct 31 04:45:28 2008
New Revision: 141488
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141488
Log:
2008-10-30 Steven G. Kargl [EMAIL PROTECTED
--- Comment #19 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-31 04:52
---
Subject: Bug 37930
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Oct 31 04:51:04 2008
New Revision: 141489
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141489
Log:
2008-10-30 Steven G. Kargl [EMAIL PROTECTED
--- Comment #33 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-29 04:45
---
Subject: Bug 37707
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Oct 29 04:44:15 2008
New Revision: 141420
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141420
Log:
2008-10-28 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #34 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-29 04:47
---
Fixed on 4.3, closing
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #35 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-29 04:48
---
Subject: Bug 37707
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Oct 29 04:47:20 2008
New Revision: 141421
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141421
Log:
2008-10-28 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-25 23:56
---
Created an attachment (id=16547)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16547action=view)
Experimental patch
With this patch, I see some improvement with a more realistic test case. Here
are test
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-25 23:58
---
Created an attachment (id=16548)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16548action=view)
The test program used above.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37754
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-25 23:59
---
Created an attachment (id=16549)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16549action=view)
Program to generate simple test file used above.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37754
--- Comment #29 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-23 02:32
---
Subject: Bug 37707
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu Oct 23 02:31:00 2008
New Revision: 141317
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141317
Log:
2008-10-22 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #30 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-23 02:43
---
Subject: Bug 37707
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu Oct 23 02:42:36 2008
New Revision: 141318
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141318
Log:
2008-10-22 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #31 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-23 02:50
---
Fixed on trunk, backport to 4.3?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37707
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 15:29
---
Subject: Bug 37863
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Oct 19 15:28:25 2008
New Revision: 141227
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141227
Log:
2008-10-19 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #23 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 15:29
---
Subject: Bug 37707
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Oct 19 15:28:25 2008
New Revision: 141227
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141227
Log:
2008-10-19 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #24 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 15:31
---
Subject: Bug 37707
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Oct 19 15:30:32 2008
New Revision: 141228
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141228
Log:
2008-10-19 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #25 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 15:39
---
(In reply to comment #22)
default:
- dtp-u.p.nml_delim = '\0';
+ dtp-u.p.nml_delim = '';
wouldn't it be easier/faster to simply remove the whole switch and use simply
dtp-u.p.nml_delim
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 15:43
---
Fixed on 4.3 and 4.4
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #27 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 18:16
---
The namelist_18.f90 test change is because we are now defaulting to a quote
delimiter. We do not write a namelist without character string delimiters.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37707
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 18:36
---
Fixed on trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 18:37
---
Subject: Bug 37834
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Oct 19 18:36:21 2008
New Revision: 141231
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141231
Log:
2008-10-19 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #20 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 17:46
---
There are a few problems going on here. When writing a namelist with no delim=
specified, we should default to a quote. That is trivial. Then, we also need
to enable finding a namelist object name vs
--- Comment #21 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 21:48
---
Created an attachment (id=16515)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16515action=view)
Proposed patch for this second test case.
Toon and Tobias: Please try this attached patch. This fixes
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 22:09
---
hmm, curious.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 04:00
---
*** Bug 37842 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 04:00
---
Marking this as a duplicate of 37839.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37839 ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-17 19:32
---
I will try to look at this tonight.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37863
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 05:25
---
Subject: Bug 37707
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Oct 18 05:23:47 2008
New Revision: 141207
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141207
Log:
2008-10-17 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 05:28
---
Subject: Bug 37863
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Oct 18 05:27:23 2008
New Revision: 141208
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141208
Log:
Fix ChangeLog
2008-10-17 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 05:32
---
Fixed on trunk. I accidentally committed the patch with the wrong PR number in
the Changelog (37707)
This I will backport to 4.3 in a day.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37863
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 05:36
---
Ignore comment #11. I got wrong PR number in Changelog. Should have been
37863.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37707
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-17 03:40
---
What if we do something like this:
typedef struct st_parameter_common
{
GFC_INTEGER_4 flags;
GFC_INTEGER_4 unit;
const char *filename;
GFC_INTEGER_4 line;
CHARACTER2 (iomsg);
GFC_INTEGER_4 *iostat
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-14 01:51
---
Subject: Bug 37083
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Oct 14 01:49:51 2008
New Revision: 141101
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141101
Log:
2008-10-13 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-14 01:54
---
Subject: Bug 37083
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Oct 14 01:53:35 2008
New Revision: 141102
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=141102
Log:
2008-10-13 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-14 03:24
---
Fixed on trunk.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-12 23:27
---
Patch submitted for approval:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-10/msg00098.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37083
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-11 15:32
---
I will see if I can finalize this patch. Mikael, are you still with us? Your
approach was fine.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-11 15:54
---
I will be looking at this.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
801 - 900 of 3029 matches
Mail list logo
