Re: [patch, fortran] Fix PR 119078, putting a procedure in an abstract interface into global namespace

Am 10.03.25 um 22:34 schrieb Harald Anlauf: the patch looks basically fine but I cannot find the testcase. You're right, here it is. Best regards Thomas diff --git a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.cc b/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.cc index 20bf6e127ff..ef9c80147cc 100644 --- a/gcc/fortra

Fwd: [GSoC][Fortran – DO CONCURRENT] Interest in 2025 GSoC – Fortran DO CONCURRENT Auto-Parallelization

-- Forwarded message - From: Zhang lv Date: Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 6:06 PM Subject: Re: [GSoC][Fortran – DO CONCURRENT] Interest in 2025 GSoC – Fortran DO CONCURRENT Auto-Parallelization To: Damian Rouson Hi Damian and GFortran community, Thanks for sharing insights on the evalua

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

Hi Jerry, thanks for the review. Committed as 87c7db8b1b2c1484d6de3331098669735d33f95e. I also had it checked using the W3C validator w/o any errors. Therefore committed. Thanks again, Andre On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 10:01:46 -0700 Jerry D wrote: > On 3/10/25 9:57 AM, Jerry D wrote: > > On

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: reject SAVE of a COMMON in a BLOCK construct [PR119199]

Hi Harald, Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.  OK for mainline? Looks good to me. Thanks for the patch! Best regards Thomas

Re: [patch, fortran] Fix PR 119078, putting a procedure in an abstract interface into global namespace

Am 11.03.25 um 10:22 schrieb Andre Vehreschild: Hi Thomas, looks good to me as well. Thanks for the patch. Committed as r15-7964. Thanks Harald and Andre! Best regards Thomas

Re: [patch, fortran] Fix PR 119078, putting a procedure in an abstract interface into global namespace

Hi Thomas, looks good to me as well. Thanks for the patch. Regards, Andre On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 07:11:53 +0100 Thomas Koenig wrote: > Am 10.03.25 um 22:34 schrieb Harald Anlauf: > > > the patch looks basically fine but I cannot find the testcase. > > You're right, here it is. > > Best re

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

On 3/10/25 1:08 AM, Andre Vehreschild wrote: Hi Steve and Jerry, thanks for the review and the proposed changes. I have based on them, but needed to adapt some places, because the meaning was changed. Can you please take another look? Jerry, where do I find this check-script? In bin/ nothing ju

[Fortran, Patch, PR98903, v1] Add parsing and code gen for TEAM_NUMBER in coindexes.

Hi all, attached patch adds parsing of TEAM_NUMBER= named arguments in coindexed expressions. The patch also ensures that once in an image_selector_list no more regular coarray indexes are accepted, i.e. coarray[1,2,3, STAT=S, 5] is rejected, because the 5 must not come after any of (STAT, TEAM, T

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

On 3/10/25 9:57 AM, Jerry D wrote: On 3/10/25 1:08 AM, Andre Vehreschild wrote: Hi Steve and Jerry, thanks for the review and the proposed changes. I have based on them, but needed to adapt some places, because the meaning was changed. Can you please take another look? Jerry, where do I find

Re: [GSoC][Fortran – DO CONCURRENT] Interest in 2025 GSoC – Fortran DO CONCURRENT Auto-Parallelization

On 3/10/25 4:29 AM, Damian Rouson wrote: If this moves forward, I’d like to offer example code to target in Fiats (https://go.lbl.gov/fiats ).  I presented automatic parallelization results produced by compiling with LLVM flang- new for inference at the PAW-ATM worksho

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: reject SAVE of a COMMON in a BLOCK construct [PR119199]

Hi Thomas! Am 11.03.25 um 07:13 schrieb Thomas Koenig: Hi Harald, Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.  OK for mainline? Looks good to me. Thanks for the patch! Committed as r15-7966-g5e9f71254a5276. Thanks for the review! Best regards Thomas

Re: [Fortran, Patch, PR98903, v1] Add parsing and code gen for TEAM_NUMBER in coindexes.

Hi Andre! Am 11.03.25 um 17:13 schrieb Andre Vehreschild: Hi all, attached patch adds parsing of TEAM_NUMBER= named arguments in coindexed expressions. The patch also ensures that once in an image_selector_list no more regular coarray indexes are accepted, i.e. coarray[1,2,3, STAT=S, 5] is reje

Re: [Fortran, Patch, PR107143, v1] Fix gimplification error in forall' pointer remapping

Hi Harald, I try to explain why I think my patch although solving the issue for this case, does not do so in every case: My patch lets dependency analysis figure that the two objects can not have any dependencies on each other or memory they are pointing to when the types are different. Lets assu