Hello,
On 27/11/2021 21:56, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/array.c b/gcc/fortran/array.c
index 6552eaf3b0c..fbc66097c80 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/array.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/array.c
@@ -1804,6 +1804,12 @@ expand_constructor (gfc_constructor_base base)
if (empty_con
On 11/30/21 8:54 PM, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote:
Hi Tobias,
You seem to be quite convinced with your interpretation,
while I am simply confused.
If both compiler developers are confused, and actual compiler
implementations differ in their outcomes of the test case, IMNSHO it is
time
Hi Tobias,
Am 30.11.21 um 18:24 schrieb Tobias Burnus:
On 29.11.21 22:11, Harald Anlauf wrote:
"A whole array is a named array or a structure component whose final
part-ref is an array component name; no subscript list is appended."
I think in "h(3)" there is not really a named array – thus I
Hi Mikael,
Am 30.11.21 um 12:25 schrieb Mikael Morin:
Hello,
Le 29/11/2021 à 22:31, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit :
Dear all,
a trivial one: we need to check the type of the SUB argument
to the coarray IMAGE_INDEX intrinsic. It has to be an array
of type integer.
Patch by Steve Kargl.
On 29.11.21 22:11, Harald Anlauf wrote:
"A whole array is a named array or a structure component whose final
part-ref is an array component name; no subscript list is appended."
I think in "h(3)" there is not really a named array – thus I read it as
if the "Otherwise ... result value is 1" appl
Hi,
looking at the head of a generated gfortran library math function,
for example bessel_r16.c,
#if defined(GFC_REAL_16_IS_FLOAT128)
#define MATHFUNC(funcname) funcname ## q
#else
#define MATHFUNC(funcname) funcname ## l
#endif
So (I suppose I can unravel the m4 code to generate this:-)
what
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021, Mikael Morin wrote:
> On 30/11/2021 14:25, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Nov 2021, Mikael Morin wrote:
> >
> >> Le 29/11/2021 ? 16:03, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches a ?crit :
> >>> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c b/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c
> >>> index
On 30/11/2021 14:25, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021, Mikael Morin wrote:
Le 29/11/2021 à 16:03, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches a écrit :
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c b/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c
index f5ba7cecd54..16ee2afc9c0 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021, Mikael Morin wrote:
> Le 29/11/2021 à 16:03, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches a écrit :
> > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c b/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c
> > index f5ba7cecd54..16ee2afc9c0 100644
> > --- a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c
> > +++ b/gcc/fortran/frontend
Le 29/11/2021 à 16:03, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches a écrit :
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c b/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c
index f5ba7cecd54..16ee2afc9c0 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.c
@@ -5229,7 +5229,6 @@ gfc_expr_walker (gfc_expr
Hi!
On 2017-05-01T18:27:59-0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> gcc/c/
> * c-typeck.c (c_finish_omp_clauses): Emit an error on orphan OpenACC
> gang reductions.
>
> gcc/cp/
> * semantics.c (finish_omp_clauses): Emit an error on orphan OpenACC
> gang reductions.
>
>
Hi!
On 2020-07-20T12:26:48+0200, Frederik Harwath wrote:
> Thomas Schwinge writes:
>>> Can I include the patch in OG10?
> This has been delayed a bit by my vacation, but I have now committed
> the patch.
>> (Ideally, we'd also test 'serial' construct in addition to 'kernels',
>> 'parallel'
>
Hi!
On 2017-05-01T18:27:59-0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> --- a/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/openmp.c
> @@ -6090,6 +6090,18 @@ resolve_oacc_loop_blocks (gfc_code *code)
> + if (code->op == EXEC_OACC_LOOP
> + && code->ext.omp_clauses->lists[OMP_LIST_REDUCTION]
> + && code
Hi!
On 2017-05-01T18:27:59-0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> This patch promotes all OpenACC gang reductions on orphan loops as
> errors. Accord to the spec, orphan loops are those which are not
> lexically nested inside an OpenACC parallel or kernels regions. I.e.,
> acc loops inside acc routines
Le 29/11/2021 à 23:01, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit :
Dear all,
another trivial and obvious one, discovered by Gerhard.
We can have a NULL pointer dereference simplifying MINLOC/MAXLOC
on an array that was not properly declared.
OK for mainline / affected 11-branch after regtesting comple
Hello,
Le 29/11/2021 à 22:31, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit :
Dear all,
a trivial one: we need to check the type of the SUB argument
to the coarray IMAGE_INDEX intrinsic. It has to be an array
of type integer.
Patch by Steve Kargl.
I hope at some point he’ll finally come to a working gi
16 matches
Mail list logo
