On 8/5/2025 4:05 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2025, Yuao Ma wrote:
By the way, could you please take another look at the libquadmath update?
https://inbox.sourceware.org/fortran/kl1pr0601mb4291e1457dc09fe3aa6652c884...@kl1pr0601mb4291.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com/
Using the script
On 8/5/2025 3:05 AM, Jerry D wrote:
I think your test case should pass.
Thank you for explaining! That's exactly how my local patch works. I
believe I can refine the patch and have it ready for review ASAP.
Yuao
On Sun, 3 Aug 2025, Yuao Ma wrote:
> By the way, could you please take another look at the libquadmath update?
>
> https://inbox.sourceware.org/fortran/kl1pr0601mb4291e1457dc09fe3aa6652c884...@kl1pr0601mb4291.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com/
>
> This update uses a script to transform glibc's implement
On 8/4/25 10:31 AM, Yuao Ma wrote:
Hi all,
I am trying to understand the effect of the lower argument in the c_f_pointer
procedure. If I am correct, should the following test case pass?
If FPTR is an array, its shape is specified by SHAPE; the lower
bounds are specified by LOWER if it is pr
Hi all,
I am trying to understand the effect of the lower argument in the
c_f_pointer procedure. If I am correct, should the following test case pass?
! { dg-do run }
program lower
use iso_c_binding
type(c_ptr) :: x
integer, target :: array(12)
integer, pointer :: ptr(:, :)
integer :
With your updated patch addressing Steve's comments OK.
We have time for minor tweaks if necessary.
On 8/3/25 11:06 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Sun, Aug 03, 2025 at 12:20:24PM +0100, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
First, the easy one:
+ /* Match the binding name; depending on type (operator / gen
Hi all,
This patch cleans up a duplicate test driver.
Regression-tested. OK for trunk?
Thanks,
YuaoFrom f4e821d346652ff4f9ac1a934a6afd019f13e026 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuao Ma
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 20:19:27 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] fortran: cleanup duplicate tests for
c_f_pointer_shape_d
