Hi Andre, It's good to hear from you.
I would suggest the following: (i) Complete F2003 compliance - Now that finalization is within a whisker of compliance, this mostly leaves putting PDTs right. The framework is all there, it just needs revamping. I can provide guidance or a statement of work here. Associate still has some problems that I am working through but I expect that there will be one or two of the more difficult ones left (eg. Derived type, sibling function selectors that have not yet been parsed). (ii) Complete F2008/F2018 compliance - we have owed Ian Chivers and Jane Sleightholme this information for quite a while. Perhaps we should divide the forms between us and attempt to fill them out? Or better, perhaps, this could be the first stage of the work. I am sure that we will find lots of this like, for example, partial coverage of do concurrent. (iii) Finishing Nicolas's work on native (did we agree not to call it that?) co-arrays would also be excellent. (iv) Finally, a thorough and systematic attack on the PRs would be great, starting with the meta-bugs. However, an agreement, as Vladimir Illyich put it, an "What is to be done" is an important first step. I can only repeat Thomas's questions about whether or not your company could provide the administrative framework and, perhaps, some project management? Could Sebastian please provide us with information on what is required for the grant application? Finally, Regards Paul On Sat, 27 May 2023 at 12:24, Andre Vehreschild via Fortran < fortran@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > working full-time on a gfortran engagement would be possible for me. Given > that > my company is Germany based and we have some capacity, that would be > feasible > for us. We also have some knowledge about how to invoice authorities, > which can > be a bit difficult sometimes. > > So I regard coarray work as a good starting point. I am also in contact > with > Damian about some of his ideas. What else could we tackle? > > Regards, > Andre > > On Sat, 27 May 2023 10:08:56 +0200 > Thomas Koenig via Fortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > On 26.05.23 23:22, Jerry D via Fortran wrote: > > > Sorry about my messages getting chopped. > > > > > > On 5/25/23 9:34 PM, Jerry DeLisle via Fortran wrote: > > >> Hi all, > > >> > > >> I found this message in my spam folder tonight. > > >> > > >> Please look. I also sent a note to Damian on this. > > >> > > >> Maybe we can get someone to push forward on te native coarrays work? > > > > > > I think the native coarrays are a good field. General bug fixing would > > also be a good idea. > > > > [quoting for the mail] > > > > > I would like to discuss with the GFortran developer community whether > > > there is interest to setup a joint project to pay somebody to work on > > > GFortran full time. We have funding available for 18 months with 600k > > > EUR starting mid of June (please do not share this numbers publicly > > > yet), but we can also ask the fund for more money if needed. What do > you > > > think? Is it worth to bring this up on the GFortran mailing list or > > > mattermost server? > > > > It is really good so finally see a source of gfortran funding. > > > > For hiring somebody full-time for a year, I am not sure who would be > > available full-time, I think most people who have experience working > > on gfortran have other commitments. We would have to see if somebody > > has the free time. > > > > What would be great would be a possibility for people to work on > > an hourly basis on certain, well-defined projects. This is probably > > something that contributors could fit in much better, and would provide > > an additional incentive to take up gfortran work again :-) > > > > Do you know if this is, in fact, a possibility? > > > > Best regards > > > > Thomas > > > > > > > -- > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de > -- "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein
