Hi Paul,
I took a look at your patch and think I found some improvements needed. In
+bool
+gfc_check_reduce (gfc_expr *array, gfc_expr *operation, gfc_expr *dim,
+ gfc_expr *mask, gfc_expr *identity, gfc_expr *ordered)
+{
...
+ if (formal->sym->attr.allocatable || formal->sym->attr.allocatable
+ || formal->sym->attr.pointer || formal->sym->attr.pointer
+ || formal->sym->attr.optional || formal->sym->attr.optional
+ || formal->sym->ts.type == BT_CLASS || formal->sym->ts.type == BT_CLASS)
+ {
+ gfc_error ("Each argument of OPERATION at %L shall be a scalar, "
+ "non-allocatable, non-pointer, non-polymorphic and "
+ "nonoptional", &operation->where);
+ return false;
+ }
The if is only looking at the first formal argument. The right-hand sides
of the || miss a ->next-> to look at the second formal argument, right?
May be you also want to extend the tests!?
Without having looked at it, but can't you extract the whole block of
+ if (array->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER)
+ {
+ unsigned long actual_size, formal_size1, formal_size2, result_size;
...
+ return false;
+ }
+ }
and share it with the checks for co_reduce? I figure way to many DRY principle
violations are in gfortran. So when we can start this, why not do it? And a
call to a routine, like check_char_arg_conformance() speaks way better, then
having to read all that code ;-)
In gfc_resolve_reduce() identity and ordered are marked as UNUSED. Should these
not a least be resolved?
Please run contrib/check_GNU_style on your patch. It reports several issues
(haven't look into their validity).
In the Changelog:
- (gfc_check_rename): Add prototype for intrinsic with 6 arguments.
+ * gfortran.h: Add prototype for intrinsic with 6 arguments.
s/discription/description/
I also encountered that nit with the executable stack when working in
OpenCoarrays, but haven't had time (or desire) to look into it. I will put
myself into CC of the pr Jerry mentioned.
Besides the mentions above, this looks good to me.
Thanks for the patch and
Regards,
Andre
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 17:26:55 +0000
Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This version of the REDUCE intrinsic patch has evolved somewhat since the
> posting on 2nd March. The most important changes are to the wrapper
> function and the addition of two testsuite entries.
>
> The wrapper function now effects:
> subroutine wrapper (a, b, c)
> type_of_ARRAY, intent(inout) :: a, c
> type_of_ARRAY, intent(inout), optional :: b
> if (present (b)) then
> c = OPERATION (a,b )
> else
> c = a
> end if
> end subroutine
>
> The reason for wrapping OPERATION in a subroutine is to allow pointer
> arithmetic to be used throughout in the library function. The only thing
> that needs to be known about the type and kind of ARRAY is the element
> size. The second branch in the wrapper allows deep copies to be done in the
> library function, such that derived types with allocatable components do
> not leak memory. This is needed at the final step of the algorithm to copy
> the result from each iteration to the result and then nullify it.
>
> This is undoubtedly a bit heavy going for intrinsic types and so, one day
> soon I will possibly do a bit of M4ery. That said, the present version
> works for all types of ARRAY and I worry a bit about how much this
> intrinsic will be used. Thoughts?
>
> A slight niggle is the linker error that comes up if compiled without any
> optimization:
> /usr/bin/ld: warning: /tmp/cc9cx9Rw.o: requires executable stack (because
> the .note.GNU-stack section is executable)
> I think that this is unlikely to present a security issue, however, since
> it disappears at -O1, I went through each of the options triggered by -O1
> but couldn't make it go away. Does anybody know why this is?
>
> Regtests OK with FC41/x86_64 - OK for mainline?
>
> Regards
>
> Paul
--
Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
