--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-22 05:31 ---
No.
Confirmed - thanks for picking it up.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-20 18:55 ---
Subject: Bug 45081
Author: pault
Date: Mon Sep 20 18:55:12 2010
New Revision: 164448
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164448
Log:
2010-09-20 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-20 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 45081
Author: pault
Date: Mon Sep 20 21:23:38 2010
New Revision: 164457
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164457
Log:
2010-09-20 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-16 05:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=21808)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21808action=view)
A fix for this PR
Bootstraps and regtests on FC9/x86_64.
It is clear that many other array intrinsics fail
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-21 11:57 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Hello Paul,
I think the patch you committed to 4.5 causes a regression for normal
loops, which are now handled as overlapping.
Thomas,
I did not commit anything but I tried it out
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-20 05:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=21527)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21527action=view)
fix for the PR
Regtests on Ubuntu10.03/i686. Will submit properly this weekend.
This was some light relief from
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-18 18:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=21513)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21513action=view)
The beginings of a fix
This PR is going to drive me mad!
The immediate cause is a failure to get
--- Comment #27 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-17 09:42 ---
(In reply to comment #25)
(In reply to comment #21)
In my opinion revision 162487 is only a partial fix of the problem. If I
split
a modified test case in two files: [...] I still get [...] Bus error
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-17 12:07 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Confirmed as a regression: it compiles with 4.2.4 (ppc-darwin), gives an ICE
with 4.3.4, 4.4.2, 4.5.0 and trunk.
You did not mark the PR as confirmed :-)
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 14:26 ---
Subject: Bug 24524
Author: pault
Date: Fri Jul 23 14:25:55 2010
New Revision: 162462
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162462
Log:
2009-07-23 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-19 18:49 ---
Subject: Bug 42385
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jul 19 18:48:44 2010
New Revision: 162313
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162313
Log:
2010-07-19 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 07:09 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
(In reply to comment #1)
This fixes it and regtests.
+ if (array-expr_type != EXPR_VARIABLE array-expr_type !=
EXPR_FUNCTION)
The patch looks OK, but actually I fail to see when
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 16:16 ---
Subject: Bug 44353
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jul 18 16:15:43 2010
New Revision: 162286
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162286
Log:
2010-07-18 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-19 05:05 ---
Subject: Bug 44353
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jul 19 05:05:23 2010
New Revision: 162294
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162294
Log:
2010-07-19 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-16 13:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=21221)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21221action=view)
Fix for the PR
Please note that this patch contains part of Janus' clean-up of vtabs diff.
This came about
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-16 17:35 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Is this now fixed on trunk? We had to deal with the TBAA problem with the
arrival of mem-ref2.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43986
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-16 04:39 ---
PR closed. Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-16 04:49 ---
I tried to fix 4.3 but failed to find an easy way of overcoming problems with
4.3. Since this bug has been present for 10 years without being reported, I
feel quite relaxed about leaving 4.3 as it is.
Fixed on 4.4
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 16:07 ---
Subject: Bug 44773
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jul 11 16:06:53 2010
New Revision: 162059
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162059
Log:
2010-07-11 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 17:45 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
Subject: Re: [OOP] Dynamic dispatch uses broken types
Dear Tobias,
Paul, thanks for the check in. Do you plan to backport it to 4.5, which
sems to
use the same code?
When I
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 14:57 ---
Subject: Bug 44773
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jul 10 14:57:25 2010
New Revision: 162038
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162038
Log:
2010-07-10 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 16:46 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Note that I did not apply the patch to 4.4 as I said that I would. What do
you
think?
4.4 is sufficiently different from 4.5/6 that I am closing this as fixed.
Paul
--
pault
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 17:09 ---
Subject: Bug 44582
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jul 10 17:08:48 2010
New Revision: 162041
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162041
Log:
2010-07-10 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 17:09 ---
Subject: Bug 44773
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jul 10 17:08:48 2010
New Revision: 162041
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=162041
Log:
2010-07-10 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 12:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=21142)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21142action=view)
A first step to fix this bug
This does the right thing but has not been regtested because my tree is so
broken
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-06 15:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=21113)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21113action=view)
Fix for the PR
This version fixes the problem with channel.f90 and has cleaned-up/extra
comments
--
http
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-05 19:26 ---
Subject: Bug 44596
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jul 5 19:26:12 2010
New Revision: 161848
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161848
Log:
2010-07-05 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-04 14:40 ---
Subject: Bug 44596
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jul 4 14:40:34 2010
New Revision: 161801
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161801
Log:
2010-07-04 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-04 14:40 ---
Subject: Bug 44745
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jul 4 14:40:34 2010
New Revision: 161801
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161801
Log:
2010-07-04 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-01 18:27 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
(In reply to comment #8)
I'm on the road for a few days - I'll update the tree on my laptop and see what
I can do :-)
Cheers
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-29 18:58 ---
Subject: Bug 44582
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jun 29 18:57:43 2010
New Revision: 161550
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161550
Log:
2010-06-29 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-29 19:03 ---
Subject: Bug 44582
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jun 29 19:03:41 2010
New Revision: 161551
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161551
Log:
2010-06-29 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-28 17:16 ---
Subject: Bug 40158
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jun 28 17:16:06 2010
New Revision: 161504
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161504
Log:
2010-06-28 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-27 16:15 ---
Subject: Bug 43843
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jun 27 16:14:55 2010
New Revision: 161471
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161471
Log:
2010-06-27 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-27 16:15 ---
Subject: Bug 43841
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jun 27 16:14:55 2010
New Revision: 161471
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161471
Log:
2010-06-27 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-27 16:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=21017)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21017action=view)
An improved patch for the PR
Tobias,
I think that this does it - if anything it is on the conservative side
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-27 16:22 ---
Subject: Bug 43841
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jun 27 16:22:27 2010
New Revision: 161472
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161472
Log:
2010-06-27 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-27 16:22 ---
Subject: Bug 43843
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jun 27 16:22:27 2010
New Revision: 161472
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=161472
Log:
2010-06-27 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-27 16:24 ---
Fixed and backported to 4.4 and 4.5
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-27 16:33 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
OK for trunk?
Sorry, forget this for a moment - its causes regressions.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44582
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-24 15:31 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Paul, any reason not to commit the patch in comment #1?
No! I'll try to get to it on Sunday.
Cheers
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40158
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-24 15:42 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #2)
OK for trunk with the usual embellishments of ChangeLogs and testcase?
Yes, if you have an example for EXPR_FUNCTION - otherwise I would claim
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-24 15:44 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Any backport ?
Ah yes, thanks, Mikael
I have drawn up a list of PRs for which I have fixes but have not made commits.
I'll try to get through them next week.
Paul
--
http
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-20 17:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=20948)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20948action=view)
A patch for the PR
I think this correctly takes account of last night's discussion on #gfortran.
Bootstraps
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-19 12:30 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
The program below should print twice 10 10 10 10 10 but due to the bug, it
prints zeros for the first print and the tens only for the second print
Yes, indeed. This goes back to gcc-4.3
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-19 14:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=20942)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20942action=view)
Fix for PR, with testcase
This is less restrictive than requiring pure functions but is still correct, I
believe
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-19 16:42 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Created an attachment (id=20942)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20942action=view) [edit]
Tobias correctly points out various cases that are still not correct.
It looks
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-06 12:49 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
It's fixed for me too. x86_64/FC9
I'll mark it as fixed - thanks for noting that it had gone.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-05 10:40 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
OK, all this has a simple explanation. A revamped version of the original
testcase segfaults in runtime, at -O0.
! { dg-do compile }
! Test the fix for PR43895, in which the dummy
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-05 14:08 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
This is tiresome - it regtested fine, I update the tree and now I get failures
on:
alloc_comp_result_1.f90
alloc_comp_scalar_1.f90
alloc_comp_transformational_1.f90
All three segfault
--- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-05 17:51 ---
Subject: Bug 43895
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jun 5 17:51:39 2010
New Revision: 160326
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160326
Log:
2010-06-05 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-02 06:44 ---
The fix regtests fine. I will take the PR and apply the fix on friday, when I
return from a trip.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-01 04:31 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Due to my confusion over the scope of 'i' and 'I',
I posted to c.l.f. As usual Richard Maine pieced
through the standard's language.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-01 04:51 ---
Other compilers produce the expected result, whereas gfortran gives:
pr44353.f90:4.19:
data (ii(i),i=1,10) /10*1/ ! here the scope of i is the data statement
1
Error: Loop variable 'i' at (1
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-01 05:02 ---
This is rather easily fixed, I suspect:
if (sym-attr.dummy sym-attr.if_source == IFSRC_DECL)
{
...error...
}
in resolve.c should do the job. Just have to find the right place!
Confirmed
Paul
--
pault
--- Comment #55 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-26 05:11 ---
Subject: Bug 40011
Author: pault
Date: Wed May 26 05:11:04 2010
New Revision: 159852
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=159852
Log:
2010-05-26 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-24 12:31 ---
Created an attachment (id=20734)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20734action=view)
Fix for this PR and PR40011 #42
This patch regtests OK apart from some peculiarities in proc_ptr_comp_9.f90
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-20 13:51 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Am I right in thinking that -fwhole-file could be enabled by default, if this
PR were to be fixed? (The appropriate changes in the testsuite would have to
be mad too.)
Paul
--
http
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-19 04:28 ---
Fixed. Thanks, Joost!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-19 04:32 ---
Fixed. Thanks, Tobias.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-08 12:57 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
(In reply to comment #9)
It even works!
Paul, any news here? This looks very useful!
See also PR41137.
Daniel,
I totally forgot about this one. I had a first tinker since comment
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-08 12:59 ---
Thanks for noticing this Daniel.
Closed - fixed
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-08 14:02 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Paul, this PR seems to be fixed. Can it be closed?
Yes. I said on the list that I would not backport, unless asked, and then
waited :-)
Thanks for jogging my memory.
Pau
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-08 14:05 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
(In reply to comment #8)
I guess everything is fixed now. Can we close this PR?
Ping?
Note that I did not apply the patch to 4.4 as I said that I would. What do you
think?
Cheers
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 21:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=20571)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20571action=view)
Fix for the PR
Boostraps and regtests on RHEL5.4/i686
Will add testcase and ChangeLogs tomorrow.
Paul
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-05 05:07 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Created an attachment (id=20558)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20558action=view) [edit]
draft patch
Mikael,
I am pretty much out of the loop for the next two weeks
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-01 17:16 ---
I do not see any reason not to confirm this one.
This
Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/resolve.c (revision 158958)
--- gcc
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-30 06:51 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Thanks for the help, Salvatore - I hope that it will continue.
Paul and Janus
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-30 14:33 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Another OOP problem found by Salvatore.
Jim Xia confirms that NAG f95 gives the correct result, cf.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/e18d0434c46598e2
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 19:11 ---
Subject: Bug 42680
Author: pault
Date: Thu Apr 29 19:10:48 2010
New Revision: 158910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158910
Log:
2010-04-29 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #38 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 19:11 ---
Subject: Bug 42274
Author: pault
Date: Thu Apr 29 19:10:48 2010
New Revision: 158910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158910
Log:
2010-04-29 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 19:11 ---
Subject: Bug 43492
Author: pault
Date: Thu Apr 29 19:10:48 2010
New Revision: 158910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158910
Log:
2010-04-29 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #33 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 19:11 ---
Subject: Bug 42353
Author: pault
Date: Thu Apr 29 19:10:48 2010
New Revision: 158910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158910
Log:
2010-04-29 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 19:11 ---
Subject: Bug 41829
Author: pault
Date: Thu Apr 29 19:10:48 2010
New Revision: 158910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158910
Log:
2010-04-29 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #16 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 19:11 ---
Subject: Bug 43896
Author: pault
Date: Thu Apr 29 19:10:48 2010
New Revision: 158910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158910
Log:
2010-04-29 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 19:11 ---
Subject: Bug 43326
Author: pault
Date: Thu Apr 29 19:10:48 2010
New Revision: 158910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158910
Log:
2010-04-29 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #37 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-26 10:57 ---
I think that we can mark this as closed.
Thanks, first to Salvatore for the report and second to Janus for the fix.
Salvatore, to repeat Janus's request, could you please check that there are no
further regressions
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 16:27 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
Janus,
When I got up this morning, I made a start on documenting the fortran-dev
version of gfc_find_derived_vtab with a view to understand the code flow and to
understand why the original
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 07:44 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
I posted a fix this morning.
...which gives,
{
struct polar_t D.1625;
D.1625 = b[0];
{
integer(kind=8) S.18;
S.18 = 1;
while (1)
{
if (S
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 09:28 ---
Subject: Bug 43843
Author: pault
Date: Sat Apr 24 09:28:32 2010
New Revision: 158683
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158683
Log:
2010-04-24 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 09:28 ---
Subject: Bug 43841
Author: pault
Date: Sat Apr 24 09:28:32 2010
New Revision: 158683
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158683
Log:
2010-04-24 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #28 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 12:29 ---
Subject: Bug 43227
Author: pault
Date: Sat Apr 24 12:29:23 2010
New Revision: 158687
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158687
Log:
2010-04-24 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 12:29 ---
Subject: Bug 43266
Author: pault
Date: Sat Apr 24 12:29:23 2010
New Revision: 158687
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158687
Log:
2010-04-24 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #29 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 12:30 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.5.
Thanks, as ever, Dominique!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-23 08:12 ---
I posted a fix this morning.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-22 20:01 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
struct polar_t * D.1551;
D.1551 = b[0];
S.5 = 1;
while (1)
{
if (S.5 3) goto L.3;
b[S.5 + -1] = div_pp (b[S.5 + -1], D.1551
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 14:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=20453)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20453action=view)
Version of fix for fortran-dev
This hasn been fully bootstrapped but runs gfortran.dg/dynamic*, proc* and
class
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 16:50 ---
Subject: Bug 43326
Author: pault
Date: Wed Apr 21 16:49:28 2010
New Revision: 158613
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158613
Log:
2010-04-21 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 16:51 ---
Fixed on fortran-dev.
Thanks, as usual, for the report, Janus, and thanks for the reminder, Dominique
:-)
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #23 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-20 06:19 ---
Created an attachment (id=20433)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20433action=view)
fix for this PR and PR43266
The attached is what I intend to submit tonight, unless somebody approves
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-20 18:57 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #4)
Technically this PR, fixed on trunk but not on fortran-dev, is now a
[fortran-dev Regression]. Could it be marked that way?
Yes.
Janus and Dominique
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-20 19:07 ---
Subject: Bug 43266
Author: pault
Date: Tue Apr 20 19:07:14 2010
New Revision: 158570
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158570
Log:
2010-04-20 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #26 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-20 19:07 ---
Subject: Bug 43227
Author: pault
Date: Tue Apr 20 19:07:14 2010
New Revision: 158570
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158570
Log:
2010-04-20 Paul Thomas pa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #27 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 04:27 ---
Fixed on trunk - will do 4.5 next week.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 04:53 ---
I'll do this one next - assigning to self.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 05:35 ---
Subject: Bug 43492
Author: pault
Date: Wed Apr 21 05:35:04 2010
New Revision: 158585
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158585
Log:
2010-04-21 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR fortran
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-21 05:37 ---
Not only does it regtest but I had a few minutes to commit it in your name, as
obvious! Thanks for the fix, Janus, and thanks for the report, Salvatore.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 12:12 ---
I decided to take a look at this during lunchtime today. The source that I had
to hand is the 20091203 4.5.0 snapshot. To my astonishment, this does not show
the problem. I have had a quick look at the intervening
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 18:48 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
I sort of doubt it. The problem arises because mio_symbol crashes in writing
the character length of the procedure symbol:
Breakpoint 1, mio_symbol (sym=0x9d02370)
at ../../fortran-dev
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 21:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=20429)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20429action=view)
A provisional fix for the PR
This needs cleaning up and FAILUREs of the gfc_resolve_expr's need dealing
1 - 100 of 3028 matches
Mail list logo
