On 13 November 2022 21:29:50 CET, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>Replacing "int" by "signed char" adds confusion and makes code
>less understandable, so I would oppose it, as we don't solve a
>real problem and rather add confusion.
Ok so consider the non-bool hunks dropped, they just fell out of my
Am 13.11.22 um 11:39 schrieb Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc-patches:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 12:13:26 +0200
Janne Blomqvist wrote:
On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 1:47 AM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
wrote:
--- a/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
@@ -1135,7 +1135,7 @@
On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 12:13:26 +0200
Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 1:47 AM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
> wrote:
> > --- a/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
> > @@ -1135,7 +1135,7 @@ compare_complex (gfc_expr *op1, gfc_expr *op2)
> > strings. We
On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 1:47 AM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran
wrote:
> --- a/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
> @@ -1135,7 +1135,7 @@ compare_complex (gfc_expr *op1, gfc_expr *op2)
> strings. We return -1 for a < b, 0 for a == b and 1 for a > b.
> We use the
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
* arith.cc (compare_complex): Use narrower return type.
(gfc_compare_string): Likewise.
* arith.h (gfc_compare_string): Same.
(gfc_compare_with_Cstring): Ditto.
* array.cc (compare_bounds): Ditto.
(gfc_compare_array_spec):
