On 9/2/25 6:06 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
Hi All,
This is another relatively straight forward PDT patch that enables
typebound procedures with a parameterized kind specification for the interface.
Regtests with FC42/x86_64. OK for mainline
Paul
PS Patches for PRs 84432, 103414 & 114815
Hi Jerry,
For some reason (fingers!) pdt_41.f03 had disappeared from my tree. Now
that I have pulled afresh, there it is. Consider that the numbers of the
tests in today's submissions are bumped by one.
Thanks for spotting that and for the reviews. I'll push first thing
tomorrow.
Regards
Paul
Hi All,
This is another straightforward patch that detects variables with
non-integer type being used as PDT parameters. Note that much of the time,
when being parsed, variable expressions have type BT_PROCEDURE and so the
type of the symbol must be checked. The parameter fed to the PDT
in pr95090
Dear all,
here's an attempt to fix a technical regression for TRANSFER with
an unlimited polymorphic SOURCE argument. As this is something
where others are more familiar with (Paul?), I might have missed
something, so be extra careful when reviewing.
Otherwise regtests fine on x86_64-pc-linux-g
On 9/2/25 4:43 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
Hi All,
The attached ChangeLogs explain the chunk in expr.cc. The chunk
in is_extension_of was something of a surprise to me since I thought that we had
stopped using the hash to identify derived types and to restrict their use to
intrinsic types
Hi Tobias,
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 4:57 PM Tobias Burnus wrote:
> BTW: I notice '(Stripping trailing CRs from patch; use --binary to disable.)'
> when applying the patch. - Spurious '\r' in committed patches should be
> avoided, albeit testcases with '\r\n' are fine as we also need to support
> th
Hi All,
The attached ChangeLogs explain the chunk in expr.cc. The chunk
in is_extension_of was something of a surprise to me since I thought that
we had stopped using the hash to identify derived types and to restrict
their use to intrinsic types a long time ago. Using the vptr location is
unambig
Hi Yuao,
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Based on our previous discussion, we
don't need to necessarily handle this in the current patch; I just
wanted to highlight it. I will investigate how the argument-passing
logic works.
Yes, as long as there is a 'sorry' instead of producing wrong code,
it is fine.
