Hi Jerry,
committed as r15-7345 .
Thanks for the review!
Best regards
Thomas
On 4/02/2025 01:42, Jerry D wrote:
On 2/3/25 2:14 PM, Vincent Vanlaer wrote:
Hi all,
Gentle ping for the patch below: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/
fortran/2024-December/061467.html
Best wishes,
Vincent
On 30/12/2024 00:19, Vincent Vanlaer wrote:
The -MT and -MQ options should replace
On 2/3/25 2:14 PM, Vincent Vanlaer wrote:
Hi all,
Gentle ping for the patch below: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/
fortran/2024-December/061467.html
Best wishes,
Vincent
On 30/12/2024 00:19, Vincent Vanlaer wrote:
The -MT and -MQ options should replace the default target in the
generated dep
Hi all,
Gentle ping for the patch below:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-December/061467.html
Best wishes,
Vincent
On 30/12/2024 00:19, Vincent Vanlaer wrote:
The -MT and -MQ options should replace the default target in the
generated dependency file. deps_add_target needs to be ca
Am 03.02.25 um 19:31 schrieb Jerry D:
On 2/3/25 2:49 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Steve Kargl writes:
On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 09:49:17PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
Am 01.02.25 um 21:03 schrieb Steve Kargl:
On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 07:25:51PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
the attached patch d
On 2/3/25 12:10 PM, Andi McClure wrote:
(This is an attempt to reply to a Mon Feb 3 19:09:38 GMT 2025 message by
Steve Kargl.)
> I believe that you are misreading C1223. The file is
> opened with form='unformatted'.
Hm, okay. I guess it comes down to whether you "diagram" the sentence in
t
On 2/3/25 11:55 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
Hello world,
with the following patch to the failing test case
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unsigned_15.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/
gfortran.dg/unsigned_15.f90
index da4ccd2dc17..80a7a54e380 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unsigned_15.f90
+++
(This is an attempt to reply to a Mon Feb 3 19:09:38 GMT 2025 message by
Steve Kargl.)
> I believe that you are misreading C1223. The file is
> opened with form='unformatted'.
Hm, okay. I guess it comes down to whether you "diagram" the sentence in
the spec as "An ADVANCE= specifier shall appear
Hello world,
with the following patch to the failing test case
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unsigned_15.f90
b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unsigned_15.f90
index da4ccd2dc17..80a7a54e380 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unsigned_15.f90
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unsigned_15.f9
On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 01:34:09PM -0500, Andi McClure wrote:
>
> open(10,file=path,access='stream',form='unformatted',action='read',iostat=file_error)
You opened the file with form='unformatted'.
> READ (iu,"()", ADVANCE='NO', POS=file_pos) ! iu is file unit
You then try to use a format statem
Last week, as an exercise in learning FORTRAN, I did a programming puzzle
( https://adventofcode.com/2024/day/4 ) with gfortran. I targeted the 2023
standard (*not* GNU). I saw two oddities. The first I posted about in this
mailing list already (and it turns out there is a relevant bugzilla bug).
On 2/3/25 2:49 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Steve Kargl writes:
On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 09:49:17PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
Am 01.02.25 um 21:03 schrieb Steve Kargl:
On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 07:25:51PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
the attached patch downgrades different constant character
Steve Kargl writes:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 09:49:17PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>> Am 01.02.25 um 21:03 schrieb Steve Kargl:
>> > On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 07:25:51PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>> > >
>> > > the attached patch downgrades different constant character lengths in an
>> > > array
Regression-tested on x86_64.
Seems I didn't look closely enough, I will check and resubmit.
Best regards
Thomas
14 matches
Mail list logo
