------- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-29 07:50 ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Wasn't there a bug for byte-sized strides in array descriptors? This bug > should depend on it, and PR29606 as well. > Both of you are right about PR29606. The byte-sized strides I do not remember. It is one way to go but I do not think that it is the correct one. I think that we need a new field in the descriptor or, maybe, a new species of descriptor. This field could serve two functions: (i) If present for an intrinsic type, it carries the base stride in bytes; and (ii) If present for a derived type it carries the size in bytes. The present size subfield should be used to carry a unique code for the type, so that classes can be implemented, including abstract classes.
Paul -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30625
