Re: [PATCH, v2] Fortran: fix invalid rank error in ASSOCIATED when rank is remapped [PR77652]

2022-08-18 Thread Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches
Hi Mikael, all, I've just reverted commit 0110cfd5449bae3a772f45ea2e4c5dab5b7a8ccd. As it seems that commit ca170ed9f8a086ca7e1eec841882b6bed9ec1a3a did not update bugzilla, I'll add a note to the PR and close it as invalid. Thanks, Harald Am 04.08.22 um 14:03 schrieb Mikael Morin: Le

Re: [PATCH, v2] Fortran: fix invalid rank error in ASSOCIATED when rank is remapped [PR77652]

2022-07-29 Thread Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches
Am 28.07.22 um 22:19 schrieb Mikael Morin: Hello, Le 27/07/2022 à 21:45, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit : ok, I have thought about your comments in the review process, and played with the Cray compiler.  Attached is a refined version of the patch that now rejects in addition these cases for

Re: [PATCH, v2] Fortran: fix invalid rank error in ASSOCIATED when rank is remapped [PR77652]

2022-07-28 Thread Mikael Morin
Hello, Le 27/07/2022 à 21:45, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit : ok, I have thought about your comments in the review process, and played with the Cray compiler.  Attached is a refined version of the patch that now rejects in addition these cases for which there are no possible related pointer

Re: [PATCH, v2] Fortran: fix invalid rank error in ASSOCIATED when rank is remapped [PR77652]

2022-07-27 Thread Toon Moene
On 7/27/22 21:45, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote: Hi Mikael, Am 26.07.22 um 21:25 schrieb Mikael Morin: Le 25/07/2022 à 22:18, Harald Anlauf a écrit : I would normally trust NAG more than Intel and Cray. … and yourself, it seems.  Too bad. May I suggest that, if well known Fortran

[PATCH, v2] Fortran: fix invalid rank error in ASSOCIATED when rank is remapped [PR77652]

2022-07-27 Thread Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches
Hi Mikael, Am 26.07.22 um 21:25 schrieb Mikael Morin: Le 25/07/2022 à 22:18, Harald Anlauf a écrit : I would normally trust NAG more than Intel and Cray. … and yourself, it seems.  Too bad. If somebody else convinces me to accept that NAG has it wrong this time, I would be happy to proceed.