On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 12:11:42PM +, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> On 10/03/16 16:18, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
>
> > The test gfortran.dg/unconstrained_commons.f fails in the 32 bit mode. It
> > needs some regexp
>
> Indeed, confirmed on ARM, sorry for not spotting this earlier.
>
> I believe
On 10/03/16 16:18, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
> The test gfortran.dg/unconstrained_commons.f fails in the 32 bit mode. It
> needs some regexp
Indeed, confirmed on ARM, sorry for not spotting this earlier.
I believe the variable, if there is one, should always be called 'j', as it is
in the
Alan,
The test gfortran.dg/unconstrained_commons.f fails in the 32 bit mode. It needs
some regexp capturing
mycommon.x[j_1] = _5;
as in " mycommon\.x\[.?_[0-9]+\] = _[0-9]+;"
TIA
Dominique
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Alan Lawrence
wrote:
> On 07/03/16 11:02, Alan Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> On 04/03/16 13:27, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> I think to make it work with LTO you need to mark it 'Optimization'.
>>> Also it's about
>>> arrays so maybe
>>>
>>>
On 07/03/16 11:02, Alan Lawrence wrote:
On 04/03/16 13:27, Richard Biener wrote:
I think to make it work with LTO you need to mark it 'Optimization'.
Also it's about
arrays so maybe
'Assume common declarations may be overridden with ones with a larger
trailing array'
also if we document it
On 04/03/16 13:27, Richard Biener wrote:
> I think to make it work with LTO you need to mark it 'Optimization'.
> Also it's about
> arrays so maybe
>
> 'Assume common declarations may be overridden with ones with a larger
> trailing array'
>
> also if we document it here we should eventually