On 10/06/2016 03:52 PM, Louis Krupp wrote:
I've attached an updated patch for pr69955. It works just as you said.
Please let me know if this or my patch for pr57910 is OK to check in.
Louis
Both are OK. Thanks.
Jerry
I've attached an updated patch for pr69955. It works just as you said.
Please let me know if this or my patch for pr57910 is OK to check in.
Louis
On Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:30:29 -0700 Dominique d'Humières
wrote
>
> > Le 6 oct. 2016 à 19:35, Louis Krupp
> Le 6 oct. 2016 à 19:35, Louis Krupp a écrit :
>
> Dominique,
>
> Vous avez raison. I attached the wrong patch. I've resent the message with
> the correct patch.
Which works as expected. Thanks
>
> I tried to make pr69955.f90 run only on 64-bit Linux:
>
> ! {
Dominique,
Vous avez raison. I attached the wrong patch. I've resent the message with
the correct patch.
I tried to make pr69955.f90 run only on 64-bit Linux:
! { dg-do run { target x86_64-*-linux* } }
I'm not sure there's a portable way to query virtual memory usage, and testing
this on
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 07:04:36PM +0200, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
> Dear Louis,
>
> > PR fortran/57910
> > * trans-expr.c (gfc_add_interface_mapping): Don't try to
> > dereference call-by-value scalar argument.
> >
> > The patch seems to work without breaking other tests.
> >From the patch, I
Dear Louis,
> PR fortran/57910
> * trans-expr.c (gfc_add_interface_mapping): Don't try to
> dereference call-by-value scalar argument.
>
> The patch seems to work without breaking other tests.
From the patch, I think the PR number is wrong and should be 69955.
The test fails on darwin with
At