Hi Tobias,
in (look for ^^^):
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
index 063d4c145e2..705cdc7749f 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c
@@ -355,6 +355,51 @@ gfc_has_alloc_comps (tree type, tree decl)
return false;
}
+/* Return true if TYPE is polymorphic but not with pointer attribute. */
+
+static bool
+gfc_is_polymorphic_nonptr (tree type)
+{
+ if (POINTER_TYPE_P (type))
+ type = TREE_TYPE (type);
+ if (TREE_CODE (type) != RECORD_TYPE)
+ return false;
+
+ tree field = TYPE_FIELDS (type);
+ if (!field || 0 != strcmp ("_data", IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (field))))
^^^ here you are comparing the field - name
+ return false;
+ field = DECL_CHAIN (field);
+ if (!field || 0 != strcmp ("_vptr", IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (field))))
+ return false;
+
+ return true;
+}
+
+/* Return true if TYPE is unlimited polymorphic but not with pointer attribute;
+ unlimited means also intrinsic types are handled and _len is used. */
+
+static bool
+gfc_is_unlimited_polymorphic_nonptr (tree type)
+{
+ if (POINTER_TYPE_P (type))
+ type = TREE_TYPE (type);
+ if (TREE_CODE (type) != RECORD_TYPE)
+ return false;
+
+ tree field = TYPE_FIELDS (type); /* _data */
+ if (!field)
^^^ here you don't . So theoretically this routine could match a type which
has a _len as its third field, but that is not a unlim-poly class. Maybe factor
out the test from the above routine and unify with this one to reuse the test
for a BT_CLASS?!
+ return false;
+ field = DECL_CHAIN (field); /* _vptr */
+ if (!field)
+ return false;
+ field = DECL_CHAIN (field);
+ if (!field || 0 != strcmp ("_len", IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (field))))
+ return false;
+
+ return true;
+}
+
+
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Btw, I believe the first routine can be better replaced by:
static bool
gfc_is_polymorphic_nonptr (tree type)
{
if (POINTER_TYPE_P (type))
type = TREE_TYPE (type);
return GFC_CLASS_TYPE_P (type);
}
I have no better solution for learning whether a tree's type is unlimited poly
yet.
@@ -740,6 +785,87 @@ gfc_omp_clause_copy_ctor (tree clause, tree dest, tree src)
gcc_assert (OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (clause) == OMP_CLAUSE_FIRSTPRIVATE
|| OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (clause) == OMP_CLAUSE_LINEAR);
+ /* TODO: implement support for polymorphic arrays; reject for now. */
+ /* Void arrays appear as var.0 = var._data.data. A bit hackish to
+ distinguish from 'type(c_ptr) :: var(5)' by scanning for '.';
+ this assumes that ASM_FORMAT_PRIVATE_NAME uses a '.', which most
+ systems do. */
+ if (TREE_CODE (type) == ARRAY_TYPE
+ && TREE_TYPE (type) == pvoid_type_node
+ && TREE_CODE (dest) == MEM_REF
+ && strchr (IDENTIFIER_POINTER (DECL_NAME (TREE_OPERAND (dest, 0))), '.'))
+ fatal_error (input_location,
+ "Sorry, polymorphic arrays not yet supported for "
+ "firstprivate");
I totally agree that this is hackish and I don't like for that. But I can't
come up with a better solution at the moment.
The remainder looks ok to me.
Regards,
Andre
--
Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
