https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93826
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-06
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93826
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
Missed to list the PR in the commit :-(
* OpenMP 4.5 patch which rejects this is the following:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-August/551338.html
and https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57dd9f3bfca8bb752c6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93826
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93826
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
OpenMP 5 has:
"If the *ordered* clause is present, all loops associated with the construct
must be perfectly nested; that is there must be no intervening code between any
two loops." (2.9.2 Worksharing-Loop C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93826
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #0)
> do j = 1, 8
> do k = 1, 8
> end do
> x = 5 ! <<< not translated but also not an error message
> end do
Complications: BLOCK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93826
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
The C code rejects this as follows.
The OpenACC specification talks about "tightly nested loops"; the OpenMP spec
is less clear but for "collapse" contrary to "tile" the implication that
tightly nested loops
